Need e-meter and qualified scientology auditor for Saturday June 20 [Archive]

View Full Version : Need e-meter and qualified scientology auditor for Saturday June 20

Pages : [1] 2 3

AnonOrange

15th June 2009, 11:15 PM

I got a request from the director of the Center for Inquiry in Los Angeles for someone that knows e-meters to demonstrate the device to their Independant Investigations group. They want to understand what an e-meter is typically used for in the context of scientology auditing as well as a basic explanation on how it works.

Preferably, a qualified auditor with a late model e-meter would be best. The Center for Inquiry is the same place where Tory gave a couple of lectures.
http://www.cfiwest.org/
4773 Hollywood Blvd
Hollywood, CA 90027

They would need the device and instructor by 10:00 AM on Saturday. Please contact me for further arrangements. This is a non-profit organization set up for the advancement of science and critical-thinking. It's assumed the e-meter and instructor will be provided for free. In other words, they're skeptics and they're cheap !

If time permits, I'll connect the e-meter directly to my blood veins with syringes on each arm, while people pinch me or try to wake up my body thethans!

Zinjifar

15th June 2009, 11:21 PM

If you kept yourself out of the equation there might be more people willing to demonstrate things. Why does anyone need *you* or *your* agenda?

Zinj

AnonOrange

15th June 2009, 11:24 PM

If you kept yourself out of the equation there might be more people willing to demonstrate things. Why does anyone need *you* or *your* agenda?

Zinj

It's not MY agenda. Jim Underdown of CFI west requested the e-meter. I said I'd try to find one. He asked others as well.

I really don't know what your problem is. They just want to investigate the device from a scientific standpoint. What big problem do you have with that? Do you still believe in the e-meter, the tech or do you just plain hate me? Either way, you're wrong.

alex

15th June 2009, 11:30 PM

It's not MY agenda. Jim Underdown of CFI west requested the e-meter. I said I'd try to find one. He asked others as well.

I really don't know what your problem is. They just want to investigate the device from a scientific standpoint. What big problem do you have with that? Do you still believe in the e-meter, the tech or do you just plain hate me? Either way, you're wrong.

YEA ZINJ, DO YOU STILL BELIEVE IN THE EMETER ?

:)

alex

15th June 2009, 11:33 PM

Zinjifar

15th June 2009, 11:33 PM

YEA ZINJ, DO YOU STILL BELIEVE IN THE EMETER ?

:)

Now now Alex; just because I think AO is Bozo doesn't mean I don't think you're Wormtongue :)

Zinj

Dulloldfart

15th June 2009, 11:34 PM

If time permits, I'll connect the e-meter directly to my blood veins with syringes on each arm, while people pinch me or try to wake up my body thethans!

Don't forget the garlic and silver bullets.

I doubt if you will find anyone here willing to be part of your freak show. You might just find someone willing to work with the other guy, but if all that is known ahead of time is that you will be intimately involved with the show, well, don't hold your tourniquet.

Paul

alex

15th June 2009, 11:35 PM

Now now Alex; just because I think AO is Bozo doesn't mean I don't think you're Wormtongue :)

Zinj

YOUR EVADING THE QUESTION ZINJ, DO YOU STILL BELIEVE IN THE EMETER!!
:)

(and I had to googlepedia wormtounge, having never read Tolkein.)

AnonOrange

15th June 2009, 11:39 PM

And when no one is foolish enough to connect their meter up to syringes in your arms, you can claim its all a fraud....

I'm being modest here, but I think it's a brilliant idea ! It's a simple, definitive test that all present scientology believers will be hard pressed to explain away. That test should have been done in 1950 and we would not be stuck with all that nonsense.

I'll stick the needles into my hand's veins, just to make sure I don't miss any body theathans that could be lurking in my forearms. I want to make sure I catch them all! :D

AnonOrange

15th June 2009, 11:41 PM

Don't forget the garlic and silver bullets.

I doubt if you will find anyone here willing to be part of your freak show. You might just find someone willing to work with the other guy, but if all that is known ahead of time is that you will be intimately involved with the show, well, don't hold your tourniquet.

Paul

Paul, in the past you gave me the impression that you were inquisitive and willing to subject the tech (and your telepathy hypothesis) to rigorous testing.

Why is the test I propose so different ?

Zinjifar

15th June 2009, 11:43 PM

I'm being modest here, but I think it's a brilliant idea ! It's a simple, definitive test that all present scientology believers will be hard pressed to explain away. That test should have been done in 1950 and we would not be stuck with all that nonsense.

I'll stick the needles into my hand's veins, just to make sure I don't miss any body theathans that could be lurking in my forearms. I want to make sure I catch them all! :D

Have you ever considered going out to Death Valley and laying yourself in the sun to wait for L. Ron Hubbard to rescue you?

Admittedly, the fact that He wouldn't, might tend to soften the message, but, on the bright side, you could *prove* that L. Ron Hubbard failed to 'save' you and we would have less AO onanism to deal with.

Everybody wins!

Zinj

AnonOrange

15th June 2009, 11:51 PM

Have you ever considered going out to Death Valley and laying yourself in the sun to wait for L. Ron Hubbard to rescue you?

You almost got your wish two years ago, when I got a fat tire in July with my RV in Death Valley while the temperature was (IN THE SHADE) 127 deg F (50 deg C). I had to walk a couple of miles, which was not too bad, but my GF from Belgium came close to fainting. She never came close to any kind of heat like that. Her face was very red and took a couple of hours to recover.

Back to the e-meter test, where else could I try to plug it in? :)

Dulloldfart

15th June 2009, 11:56 PM

Why is the test I propose so different ?

It has nothing much to do with how the meter is used in auditing. I have no idea if the investigative committee consists of somewhat reasonable people or if they are all as closed-minded as you. If I were in LA and available to do this test, which I won't be, I would want to talk to the head honcho ahead of time and tell him what I wanted to do, and what should happen. If following that procedure was agreeable to him, I may or may not get it in writing depending on how much I trusted what he said, then I would go ahead and do it. A crucial part of the experiment would probably be having you in another room or at least shackled and covered in duct tape so you didn't interfere at all as I couldn't trust you to allow an experiment acceptable to me to proceed uninterrupted.

My experiment would involve someone holding the cans normally, sitting down comfortably, who is willing to be honest and contribute to the activity, not do all he could to screw it up. I find the pinch test somewhat unsatisfactory. I would get in communication with the guy while holding the cans, and direct his attention to various items in his life that would be charged, whatever I could find. Maybe marital disharmony, work troubles, debts, whatever. The needle reactions and TA movements would be noted. Charged items may be desensitized or they may not. It would be good to desensitize some topic so the meter changes could be noted by the investigators. After all, in a session the meter is used to find stuff to run, to show that topics are discharging, and to finally show that a topic has been discharged, at least for the time being.

Paul

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 12:10 AM

It has nothing much to do with how the meter is used in auditing. I have no idea if the investigative committee consists of somewhat reasonable people or if they are all as closed-minded as you. If I were in LA and available to do this test, which I won't be, I would want to talk to the head honcho ahead of time and tell him what I wanted to do, and what should happen. If following that procedure was agreeable to him, I may or may not get it in writing depending on how much I trusted what he said, then I would go ahead and do it. A crucial part of the experiment would probably be having you in another room or at least shackled and covered in duct tape so you didn't interfere at all as I couldn't trust you to allow an experiment acceptable to me to proceed uninterrupted.

My experiment would involve someone holding the cans normally, sitting down comfortably, who is willing to be honest and contribute to the activity, not do all he could to screw it up. I find the pinch test somewhat unsatisfactory. I would get in communication with the guy while holding the cans, and direct his attention to various items in his life that would be charged, whatever I could find. Maybe marital disharmony, work troubles, debts, whatever. The needle reactions and TA movements would be noted. Charged items may be desensitized or they may not. It would be good to desensitize some topic so the meter changes could be noted by the investigators. After all, in a session the meter is used to find stuff to run, to show that topics are discharging, and to finally show that a topic has been discharged, at least for the time being.

Paul

Jim is a super nice guy and would be very happy to hear from you. I'll pm you his phone and e-mail address. You'll find him very reasonable and open to your comments. Unlike me, he won't dismiss the device offhand, which is why he's requesting someone that knows the e-meters to explain it to his group. He's genuinely interested to learn about it.

In your second paragrah above, the big problem is that the meter is being held by HANDS, which twitch, move and sweat. In my rather short experience with the e-meter (I did one test), I found that the hand contact is what drives most if not all the needle fluctuations.

When you do an experiment, you have to remove as many disrupting influences as much as possible. If the purpose of the e-meter is to measure electrical conductance through the body, then clearly, the hand contact interferes with the measurement. As we discussed several times, skin patches (as used for lie detectors) would be better. I feel that measuring the body's resistance through needles under the skin would be even better.

Give me one good reason, (except because Hubbard said so) that this would be an inferior way to test.

Lohan2008

16th June 2009, 12:14 AM

AO
I doubt if you will find anyone here willing to be part of your freak show.
Paul

DITTO

alex

16th June 2009, 12:14 AM

I'm being modest here, but I think it's a brilliant idea ! It's a simple, definitive test that all present scientology believers will be hard pressed to explain away. That test should have been done in 1950 and we would not be stuck with all that nonsense.

I'll stick the needles into my hand's veins, just to make sure I don't miss any body theathans that could be lurking in my forearms. I want to make sure I catch them all! :D

Body thetans are not in your body. They are attached by thier energy fields to others energy fields, which can correspond roughly to the space of "the body" but is not the same thing.

The sensation of the needles would invalidate the test anyway.

If you dont like cans, try electrodes as an alternative.

alex

16th June 2009, 12:15 AM

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 12:19 AM

Body thetans are not in your body. They are attached by thier energy fields to others energy fields, which can correspond roughly to the space of "the body" but is not the same thing.

The sensation of the needles would invalidate the test anyway.

If you dont like cans, try electrodes as an alternative.

Well then Mr. sci pants, why do you even bother making the subject hold the cans? A good pair of TV rabbit ears near the guy should be good enough right?

Exactly what do you mean about "the sensation of the needles". Sensation or sensitivity? I posit that the e-meter will read a nice steady uniform reading (as I read in the Anderson report). If the needles are more sensitive, then the meter should fluctuate more right?

Needles in the veins are better than stick on electrodes. It's clear, why can't your guys see that? What the hell, maybe I'll try the electrodes too!

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 12:22 AM

Duplicate. It's not censorship, I swear!

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 12:24 AM

The needles would create a sensation that would interfer with the results.

Well gee, wouldn't you want to test it then?

Right now I maintain that the HANDS interfere greatly with the results. That's the whole problem with using the e-meter to measure anything with the body.

If cans were so great, why don't the lie detector companies use them?

10:1 bet anyone?

alex

16th June 2009, 12:26 AM

Well them Mr. sci pants, why do you even bother making the subject hold the cans? A good pair of TV rabbit ears near the guy should be good enough right?

Exactly what do you mean about "the sensation of the needles". Sensation or sensitivity? I posit that the e-meter will read a nice steady uniform reading. If the needles are more sensitive, they the meter should fluctuate more right?

Needles in the veins are better than stick on electrodes. It's clear, why can't your guys see that? What the hell, maybe I'll try the electrodes too!

THE F 'ING NEEDLES WOULD HURT!!! (This could cause the emeter to "read" the hurt and not anything else)

:)

I would say proper stick on GSR electrodes should be valid though. They may give a different base reading than cans....or perhaps have attenuated or amplified response relative to the normal situation of cans. But the whole emeter thing in scientology is done with cans, so that should be the relevant test. Eliminate the variables another way.

The thetan, spirit part has an energy field that it shares with the body, and it is its effect on the body that is measured. I guess it could be done with some remote device, but that technology would be more complex than a simple electrical circuit and some soup cans. So why do it.

But you're an engineer perhaps you can design a remote thetan level sensor? And sell it to the anons for finding scilons.

Dulloldfart

16th June 2009, 12:28 AM

Jim is a super nice guy and would be very happy to hear from you. I'll pm you his phone and e-mail address. You'll find him very reasonable and open to your comments. Unlike me, he won't dismiss the device offhand, which is why he's requesting someone that knows the e-meters to explain it to his group. He's genuinely interested to learn about it.

In your second paragrah above, the big problem is that the meter is being held by HANDS, which twitch, move and sweat. In my rather short experience with the e-meter (I did one test), I found that the hand contact is what drives most if not all the needle fluctuations.

When you do an experiment, you have to remove as many disrupting influences as much as possible. If the purpose of the e-meter is to measure electrical conductance through the body, then clearly, the hand contact interferes with the measurement. As we discussed several times, skin patches (as used for lie detectors) would be better. I feel that measuring the body's resistance through needles under the skin would be even better.

Give me one good reason, (except because Hubbard said so) that this would be an inferior way to test.

Thanks for the details. Fingertip electrodes reportedly work well. I don't know how responsive lie-detector patches would be with an e-meter. It would depend on where they were situated and how big they are.

Finger motions might be a problem to you but thousands of auditors have managed to cope with them over 40 or 50 years. They give different reads to mental reactions and auditors are trained to know the difference (it's E-Meter drill 13 called something like "Body reactions reads" if you want to look it up). Needles in veins might work, but on the other hand might not. It's unknown to me, not something that has been tested with an e-meter as far as I know. As much as it would be fun to stick needles in you I would think it would be counter-productive. :)

Paul

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 12:49 AM

As much as it would be fun to stick needles in you I would think it would be counter-productive. :)
Paul

Counte-productive as in the test would fail? Specifically, the meter would display a steady read regardless of the questions I'd be asked?

I call that a win.

Lohan2008

16th June 2009, 12:55 AM

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 12:56 AM

THE F 'ING NEEDLES WOULD HURT!!! (This could cause the emeter to "read" the hurt and not anything else)

If the "hurt" is a steady uniform reading, will you start believing me?

I would say proper stick on GSR electrodes should be valid though. They may give a different base reading than cans....or perhaps have attenuated or amplified response relative to the normal situation of cans.

You're starting to think straight. Yes, the level bias (tone arm setting) would be different with patches. I suspect that with needles straight in the veins, the conductivity will be even greater, requiring a further tone arm adjustment.

But the whole emeter thing in scientology is done with cans, so that should be the relevant test. Eliminate the variables another way.

First, CFI just wants someone to explain the e-meter as it is used in scientology. They'll want to see someone under test with cans. It's just me that wants to do other tests, while we're at it.

The thetan, spirit part has an energy field that it shares with the body, and it is its effect on the body that is measured. I guess it could be done with some remote device, but that technology would be more complex than a simple electrical circuit and some soup cans. So why do it.

Now you're going woo woo nutty on me again.

But you're an engineer perhaps you can design a remote thetan level sensor? And sell it to the anons for finding scilons.

No I can't, it's impossible.

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 12:58 AM

next time someone wants SCILON stuff tested, I suggest that you find someone else to promote it AO...
have you noticed that LOTS of people "ignore the message" because you opened your mouth ??? :drama:

I'm not only here to educate but to entertain !

BTW, what's your specific technical objection to the e-meter test I propose?

Ted

16th June 2009, 01:08 AM

I'm being modest here, but I think it's a brilliant idea ! It's a simple, definitive test that all present scientology believers will be hard pressed to explain away. That test should have been done in 1950 and we would not be stuck with all that nonsense.

I'll stick the needles into my hand's veins, just to make sure I don't miss any body theathans that could be lurking in my forearms. I want to make sure I catch them all! :D

That sounds like a good idea!

Get someone to wiggle those needles good and hard. Then they should back off for a bit while all observe what happens next. If you can't get the needle to move with thought alone, well, have a coroner on standby, because he would be justified in pronouncing you dead. :clap:

alex

16th June 2009, 01:11 AM

If the "hurt" is a steady uniform reading, will you start believing me?

I have been on a logging GSR device with skin electrodes before (not an emter, and in a laboratory setting) and the readings varied as function of something other than movement...

But with pain, I think it would be overriding of any meter response to other thought. I certainly would be for me. It may or may not give a steady reading, I would guess that it would vary due to familiarization.

You're starting to think straight. Yes, the level bias (tone arm setting) would be different with patches. I suspect that with needles straight in the veins, the conductivity will be even greater, requiring a further tone arm adjustment.

And I wonder if the delta of the movements would be changed. Faster or slower responses....this is an added variable not the removal of one. It may be something that changes what a scientologist would see with cans.

First, CFI just wants someone to explain the e-meter as it is used in scientology. They'll want to see someone under test with cans. It's just me that wants to do other tests, while we're at it.

As much as you profess to love the scientific/skeptic aspect you sure like to throw a lot of drama into it.

Now you're going woo woo nutty on me again.

No I can't, it's impossible.

Well you can detect a body by infra red emission....remotely, and a body does have electrical activity that is influenced by the mine.....Perhaps this would require more sensitivity than currently exists....all that you wouldnt be able to "read" is the thetan, which while it directs the energy of the body is not in the energy spectrum.

...

alexm

16th June 2009, 01:28 AM

First off, you'd need a Mark VII Quantum Emeter. Those things are quite pricy and I am not sure how available they are.

Second, I'm not sure the point of any investigation. There have been investigations done on the Emeter since the FBI made raids of various orgs in the 1980's. I doubt that you will get any additional information on it that hasn't been found out before.

All you will find is what many engineers have found before, that the Emeter is a wheatstone bridge with a fancy case made for 30 bucks and sold for 5 thousand. In the end, that is the Emeter and yes it can be cheated but you need a trained auditor in order to do that. This is all old information and not new by any means.

As far as CSI, I am not interested in what skeptics have to say. I'd rather go with the past investigations done by professionals who will find nothing different that what CSI might or might not find.

So then what's the point?

The Emeter is garbage and does not do what it claims to do. In my opinion, there must other motives behind this video, which I suspect is to in order to attract new members, which is something what all organized groups have to do in order to survive. However any investigation$ that CSI does will do nothing but reinforce past knowledge that real professionals have already found out.

Now if John and CSI throws in something new, instead the plain, old, "debunking" then maybe it might be worth a gander, but I do not see anything new and sensational coming out of an investigation that has already been done before.

programmer_guy

16th June 2009, 02:29 AM

CornPie

16th June 2009, 02:52 AM

I sense a lot of "charge" on this one. Some people come across like permission needs to be sought from authoritarians just to demonstrate the emeter. This is still a free world, you know. I want to see many-many video demonstrations of the emeter. Open minded is good. But I want to see closed minded too. With many-many videos of emeter usage; serious, debunking, humor, you name it. May the one with the most YouTube "views" win.

How about a night vision camera, to film invisible BT's, "attached by their energy fields to others energy fields."

alex

16th June 2009, 04:13 AM

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 06:15 AM

I have been on a logging GSR device with skin electrodes before (not an emter, and in a laboratory setting) and the readings varied as function of something other than movement...

But with pain, I think it would be overriding of any meter response to other thought. I certainly would be for me. It may or may not give a steady reading, I would guess that it would vary due to familiarization.

[disclamer] postin somewhat drunk!

With skin electrodes, you can still have muscle twitching or sweat affecting the results. You say "varied as a function of something other than movement". Was it in response to questions, was the person talking? (Talking could cause body movements that can affect needle movement) I noted there's a sentivity setting and got the auditor to change the adjustment. It has a lot of influence on how quickly the needle moves.

As far as pain, I've donated blood many times and the pain is the initial needle insertion (and it's a rather large needle). After a minute I don't notice the pain unless I think about it. With small needles the pain would be imperceptible, much like accupuncture.

As much as you profess to love the scientific/skeptic aspect you sure like to throw a lot of drama into it.

Getting two small needles in the hands is really not that dramatic. You're right in saying I like drama, but I need to introduce serious stage magic before we can call that test dramatic.

Well you can detect a body by infra red emission....remotely, and a body does have electrical activity that is influenced by the mine.....Perhaps this would require more sensitivity than currently exists....all that you wouldnt be able to "read" is the thetan, which while it directs the energy of the body is not in the energy spectrum.

Tha's all fine except that you won't read thetans. There are no theatans, engrams and all the other sci gremlins.

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 06:26 AM

As far as CSI, I am not interested in what skeptics have to say. I'd rather go with the past investigations done by professionals who will find nothing different that what CSI might or might not find.

So then what's the point?

First it's CFI, not CSI. I consider them professionals. Some of the members are electrical engineers, others are in various professions. The skeptics just want to understand the device, get a demonstration how it should be properly used, what it can do and cannot do. They are genuinely interested as you saw Jim ask questions about it.

Just to make it clear, I'm the asshole here, not them! They want to make an honest investigation. I've known some of these guys for many years and they are going to do a good job trying to understand how the meter is used in the proper context.

On the other hand, I believe I know enough by just looking at the device and reading two pages of Dianetics to know that the whole thing is a scam. I just want to f*ck with it and prove my point. But that's just me. CFI is not like that and my test would be something separate.

The test needs to be done again, because, Scientology is a hot topic now and to my knowledge none of those e-meter tests were ever video recorded and available to a mass audience.

alexm

16th June 2009, 06:42 AM

First it's CFI, not CSI. I consider them professionals. Some of the members are electrical engineers, others are in various professions. The skeptics just want to understand the device, get a demonstration how it should be properly used, what it can do and cannot do. They are genuinely interested as you saw Jim ask questions about it.

Just to make it clear, I'm the asshole here, not them! They want to make an honest investigation. I've known some of these guys for many years and they are going to do a good job trying to understand how the meter is used in the proper context.

On the other hand, I believe I know enough by just looking at the device and reading two pages of Dianetics to know that the whole thing is a scam. I just want to f*ck with it and prove my point. But that's just me. CFI is not like that and my test would be something separate.

The test needs to be done again, because, Scientology is a hot topic now and to my knowledge none of those e-meter tests were ever video recorded and available to a mass audience.

Sorry about the CSI, I have no idea why I wrote that because CSI is Church of Scientology International.

Anyway, get the Mark VII Quantum but I still do not know what you would find that has not been found before however like you say, maybe you will.

programmer_guy

16th June 2009, 06:51 AM

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 07:24 AM

AnonOrange,

I am surprised that you don't think that skin resistance could be affected by thoughts.
Any polygraph test would tell you that this is true.

As I said before, the e-meter is just a cheap polygraph.

Being nervous will affect the amount of sweat you poduce and affect the meter - greatly.

That's different than saying the e-meter measures specific thoughts.

But that's still not the claim made by e-meter believers. It's supposed to measure internal changes in the body, not on the skin. I've never read anything by Hubbard or anybody else in scientology saying the meter measures galvanic skin resistance. It's all about body theatans, suppressed memories and mostly things in your head. In fact during my last e-meter session, the lady said that everything comes from the mind and the e-meter has the ability to measure mental processes. I don't believe it does and that's what I'd like to show is the simple experiment of hooking up directly to the veins.

How about attaching the alligator clips to my ears and see if the needle moves? That's a test good for TV!

xenusdad

16th June 2009, 08:59 AM

Guys, girls, none of the above is called for, stop it, you'll wear your fingers out
:no:

Ted

16th June 2009, 01:40 PM

Well then Mr. sci pants, why do you even bother making the subject hold the cans? A good pair of TV rabbit ears near the guy should be good enough right?

Exactly what do you mean about "the sensation of the needles". Sensation or sensitivity? I posit that the e-meter will read a nice steady uniform reading (as I read in the Anderson report). If the needles are more sensitive, then the meter should fluctuate more right?

Needles in the veins are better than stick on electrodes. It's clear, why can't your guys see that? What the hell, maybe I'll try the electrodes too!

Here in the Freakzone we don't use rabbit ears, but a good tin-foil hat works wonders. :thumbsup:

You still have to connect the e-meter to the subject; tin cans work best. The tin-foil hat gives that warm, fuzzy, secure feeling that certain people respond to so favorably. This would be your best chance of observing a floating needle.

In your case, if you could bring yourself to hold the cans steadily, and with tin-foil hat in place, a parade of naked bodies, hot ones and ugly ones, of your chosen sexual orientation, would send the needle into a response mode of rises and falls. :thumbsup:

Also, I am looking forward to a full report. Have someone take pictures. :goodluck:

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 02:27 PM

You still have to connect the e-meter to the subject; tin cans work best. The tin-foil hat gives that warm, fuzzy, secure feeling that certain people respond to so favorably. This would be your best chance of observing a floating needle.

In your case, if you could bring yourself to hold the cans steadily, and with tin-foil hat in place, a parade of naked bodies, hot ones and ugly ones, of your chosen sexual orientation, would send the needle into a response mode of rises and falls. :thumbsup:

An even better test would be to have two e-meters hooked up to the person (me:coolwink:) at the same time, where one of the hookups would be through the cans and the other with the needles. The meters would be next to each other so the meter's response could be recorded simultaneously. Then the parade of naked bodies, farm animals, space aliens could talke pace so we could determine if it's all about grasping the cans rather than body response to stimuli.

Dulloldfart

16th June 2009, 02:36 PM

Then the parade of naked bodies, farm animals, space aliens could talke pace so we could determine if it's all about grasping the cans rather than body response to stimuli.

No-one who is familiar with metered auditing is disputing that deliberately wiggling your fingers while holding cans makes the needle move.

I would have no objection in theory to the double hook-up, cans to one meter and needles in veins to the other. I would be interested to see if the needles version shows the same reads, or any reads, or even — dare I say it — magnified reads. I am assuming for this that you (AO) could be prevailed on to hold your fingers still, or at least as still as most people who hold the cans manage to.

Paul

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 04:51 PM

No-one who is familiar with metered auditing is disputing that deliberately wiggling your fingers while holding cans makes the needle move.

My claim is much of the needle movement is due to unconscious, non-deliberate effect of hand/finger changing positions lightly or slight grip pressure changes. Look up the idomotor effect, which are slight unconscious body movements.

Using the two meter test, you would be able to see that, because from what I read in the Anderson report, the body's conduction is pretty much even, regarless of auditing questions.

Ted

16th June 2009, 04:51 PM

No-one who is familiar with metered auditing is disputing that deliberately wiggling your fingers while holding cans makes the needle move.

I would have no objection in theory to the double hook-up, cans to one meter and needles in veins to the other. I would be interested to see if the needles version shows the same reads, or any reads, or even — dare I say it — magnified reads. I am assuming for this that you (AO) could be prevailed on to hold your fingers still, or at least as still as most people who hold the cans manage to.

Paul

It is my experience that given a "normal" hand holding of the cans, that is to say, a relaxed grip with no unnecessary space between hands, fingers, and cans, and a can squeeze producing 1/3 dial drop of the needle, a brutal can squeeze will move the TA down 1/2 to 1 full division, no more. YMMV, but not by much.

In auditing, a TA BD of 1/2 to 1 division is not uncommon.

A TA BD of 2 full divs is less common but it happens.

And, on occasion a TA BD if 3+ divs happens.

What I am getting at is this: No amount of can pressure will cause that level of BD given a normal, relaxed grip to begin with.

A for the sweat-unsweat complaint, how about dunking the hands in two buckets of water? You will need someone to operate the meter. And it will do no good to work with someone who cannot make the needle move by thought/emotion alone. Yeah, that should work to debunk that issue.

NeXTep

16th June 2009, 05:13 PM

If time permits, I'll connect the e-meter directly to my blood veins with syringes on each arm, while people pinch me or try to wake up my body thethans!

I would like to see that one. :omg:

Bet you wouldn't stay connected to it more than a microsecond.

Blood is a better conductor than just skin, so go figure.

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 05:38 PM

It is my experience that given a "normal" hand holding of the cans, that is to say, a relaxed grip with no unnecessary space between hands, fingers, and cans, and a can squeeze producing 1/3 dial drop of the needle, a brutal can squeeze will move the TA down 1/2 to 1 full division, no more. YMMV, but not by much.

Last weekend, when I tried an e-meter, I was able to make the needle move like a wiper blade just by squeezing normally on/off. I asked the scientologist to reduce the sensitivity and I could still control it totally.

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 05:41 PM

I would like to see that one. :omg:

Bet you wouldn't stay connected to it more than a microsecond.

Blood is a better conductor than just skin, so go figure.

The current produced by such a device is extremely low. I don't think I'll feel it at all.

Been Done Had

16th June 2009, 05:43 PM

Hey, AO...

You would have had better luck actually getting someone to show up by simply mentioning CFI and their intent. You made it the AO show with your talk of needles. I understand your skepticism and accept it. But your derision is unwarranted. The invitation FEELS like this; "Show up and I'll prove you are crazy."

CFI plus a trained auditor doing E-meter drills is interesting.

The AO grudge match with needles sounds scary.

It is clear you really have your mind made up on GSR phenomenon without testing it. As an engineer you now better.

And yes in the E-meter books resistance is mentioned, the mechanism described is mental image pictures affect body resistance as measure by a Wheatstone Bridge circuit. That's in the books. It is not explicitly labeled GSR although it may be in some lectures. But yes, the meter measures resistance and that is what auditors are taught.

We've covered the E-meter territory before. I'd like to sum up your claims...

1. E-meter reads are either sweat or movement based.

2. There is no GSR response to mental activity.

3. Auditing is a fraud.

Regarding point 1:

Two seconds on a meter will teach you that is not the case. The needle is dynamic. The reads happen quickly, yes people sweat and it will cause a steady decrease in resistance over time. But all the standard reads of auditing occur independant of this mechanism. Yes, movement affects the needle. And quite a bit. But unless the PC is intentionally moving this is not a problem. You can simulate some reads by hand and body movement. But an auditor is trained to recognize this. Involuntary micro-movements of the hand in no way account for ALL needle phenomenon and have almost NO EFFECT on needle movement.

Point 2: See the following link. Carl Jung studied the mind/GSR link a long time ago and established there IS a connection. There are MANY, MANY research papers showing this. This is not in doubt in the mental health community. It is established fact.

http://sidis.net/galvanicjung3.htm

Point 3: This is subjective. I have had gains from auditing. Mostly along the lines of self awareness. I have also seen others cratered by bad auditing. I suggest you give it a serious go and decide for yourself. You would have to be open and willing and give it a chance. If you do it with the outcome decided, well then the outcome will be decided.

I really hope someone does step forward and take up the CFI offer, separate out AO's agenda. The results wil be very interesting.

Oh, and AO...

Maybe you could post CFIs information, some people here may be more comfortable dealing with them directly and cutting out the middleman.

alex

16th June 2009, 06:28 PM

My claim is much of the needle movement is due to unconscious, non-deliberate effect of hand/finger changing positions lightly or slight grip pressure changes. Look up the idomotor effect, which are slight unconscious body movements.

Using the two meter test, you would be able to see that, because from what I read in the Anderson report, the body's conduction is pretty much even, regarless of auditing questions.

Thats what the sensitivity setting is for...it is a fairly small change in resistence.

Dulloldfart

16th June 2009, 08:06 PM

Thats what the sensitivity setting is for...it is a fairly small change in resistence.

In some cases, yes, but remember that TA 2.0 = 5000 ohms and TA 3.0 = 12,500 ohms, so there can be large changes too.

Paul

AnonOrange

16th June 2009, 08:13 PM

Hey, AO...
You would have had better luck actually getting someone to show up by simply mentioning CFI and their intent.

That's what I originally posted and then Alex and Zinj got in to crash the thread, which is fine.

You can contact them directly and I posted the info above. IIG is a sub-group of CFI in Los Angeles. There's an anon that's part of the group too.
http://www.iigwest.com/

You made it the AO show with your talk of needles. I understand your skepticism and accept it. But your derision is unwarranted. The invitation FEELS like this; "Show up and I'll prove you are crazy."

You're right about that, but I'm honest about it !

CFI plus a trained auditor doing E-meter drills is interesting.

Not really. Screams of pain and e-meters blowing up, now that's interesting.

It is clear you really have your mind made up on GSR phenomenon without testing it. As an engineer you now better.

Do you think we need to stand under an apple tree again and confirm gravity? I knew the e-meter was bullshit 25 years ago, just by looking at it.

And yes in the E-meter books resistance is mentioned, the mechanism described is mental image pictures affect body resistance as measure by a Wheatstone Bridge circuit. That's in the books. It is not explicitly labeled GSR although it may be in some lectures. But yes, the meter measures resistance and that is what auditors are taught.

It better NOT mention GSR, because that would invalidate the whole use of e-meters as a method of measuring thoughts! Last time I checked, my hand skin did not have much to do with thinking.

We've covered the E-meter territory before. I'd like to sum up your claims...

1. E-meter reads are either sweat or movement based.

2. There is no GSR response to mental activity.

3. Auditing is a fraud.

Regarding point 1:

Two seconds on a meter will teach you that is not the case. The needle is dynamic. The reads happen quickly, yes people sweat and it will cause a steady decrease in resistance over time. But all the standard reads of auditing occur independant of this mechanism. Yes, movement affects the needle. And quite a bit. But unless the PC is intentionally moving this is not a problem. You can simulate some reads by hand and body movement. But an auditor is trained to recognize this. Involuntary micro-movements of the hand in no way account for ALL needle phenomenon and have almost NO EFFECT on needle movement.

In my brief experience, I could keep it steady regardless of the discussion. There was a slight drift to the right (falling), which I attribute to slow build up of sweat.

Point 2: See the following link. Carl Jung studied the mind/GSR link a long time ago and established there IS a connection. There are MANY, MANY research papers showing this. This is not in doubt in the mental health community. It is established fact.

http://sidis.net/galvanicjung3.htm

When you get nervous, you sweat and GSR resistance lowers and that's about it. If you think of cute puppies or what Jeffery Dahmer had for breakfast, I don't think the reading will be that different. (mind you, I have not tested it yet, but that's my hunch) If you get startled by a loud noise or a slap at the back of the head, then the electricity going to your muscles will definitely register on the device.

Carl Jung was a nut case. He was not really a scientist in my opinion. He was no Freud, and even Freud has been proven mostly wrong. Science progresses and will further improve over time.

About 15 years ago, I dated a psychiatrist and we were in a bookstore to buy a book by Jung. I simply saw the title "Synchronicity" and told her it was bullshit. She said, yeah but it's good bullshit! She liked reading that stuff. BTW, I caught up with her at the SF Psych convention.

Point 3: This is subjective. I have had gains from auditing. Mostly along the lines of self awareness.

You had "gains" because you spent many hours with a human discussing your problems. That's very theraputic.

You also spent a small fortune, which I believe would have been better spend speaking to a liscensed psychologist, who by law must have a PhD here in CA. It's also very likely that you didn't have any problems, which is the case for most people entering Scientology. They're perfectly fine going in and the higher up the bridge they go, the more messed up they are. Jason Begehe said that.

Dulloldfart

16th June 2009, 08:28 PM

Are there any videos of parts of genuine metered sessions online, with close shots of the meter? I know about Hardeep's session, around the 45-minute mark in that Channel 4 documentary. Any others?

Paul

Ted

16th June 2009, 09:08 PM

Last weekend, when I tried an e-meter, I was able to make the needle move like a wiper blade just by squeezing normally on/off. I asked the scientologist to reduce the sensitivity and I could still control it totally.

Why quote my statement if you are going to completely ignore it?

Me thinks that between your fixed ideas and lack of experience with the meter, no communication is possible.

Good luck.

EP - Ethics Particle

16th June 2009, 09:47 PM

Why quote my statement if you are going to completely ignore it?

Me thinks that between your fixed ideas and lack of experience with the meter, no communication is possible.

Good luck.

Yer right, Ted - but ya gotta give AO credit fer an abundance of CERTAINTY! :D

(As for me...just about every time I have been totally certain about something or another...turned out I was wrong.):ohmy: :blush: :bigcry:

Jes' sayin'...:whistling:

EP

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 07:45 AM

.(As for me...just about every time I have been totally certain about something or another...turned out I was wrong.):ohmy: :blush: :bigcry:

We're talking e-meters and scientology here! History is on my side.

BTW, why do you guys go all twisty panty when I propose to test e-meters?

programmer_guy

17th June 2009, 08:08 AM

BTW, why do you guys go all twisty panty when I propose to test e-meters?

I don't care if you "test" this or not. If you want to deliberately try to fool someone that is using an e-meter you might be able to do so (well trained auditors will spot this, however).

If you co-operate with the process, and not try to fool anyone, you will find out that it does read on past incidents.

Again, as I said before, if you want to debunk SCN auditing then I believe that you are barking up the wrong tree. The e-meter is not the issue.

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 04:05 PM

Again, as I said before, if you want to debunk SCN auditing then I believe that you are barking up the wrong tree. The e-meter is not the issue.

The e-meter IS the issue of this paticular thread. The main issue is CFI wants one along with a trained auditor. I also personally want to do other checks to see if the meter reacts when it measures body conductance when connected directly to the blood.

I actually think that Scn auditing could be beneficial, because you are sitting down with a real person and talking about your problems. That's similar to the services you'd get from a liscened therapist or psychologist, except that in most countries the scientology psychological service is illegal, because the Sci auditors are not scientifically trained with an approved curriculum. In addition, besides the discarded theories about engrams, theatans and the such, I believe the e-meter totally disrupts what could be a beneficial session. The auditor will make readings from the e-meter, which reacts mostly to skin contact quality, and that will most likely give a bad diagnosis.

I'm not really qualified to judge the quality of a therapy session, but I am fully qualified to show that the e-meter does not measure what it's intended to measure and I believe that it's use randomnizes the evaluation of the subject. Basically, it makes things worse for the auditor. By using the meter sub-cutaneously, skin contact is out of the equation and you will see what this thing measures or not.

Patricia Curtis

17th June 2009, 05:11 PM

Call me crazy but I like the idea of AO jabbing himself with needles.:wink2: :geekon:

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 06:07 PM

Call me [edit: vengeful sadist] but I like the idea of AO jabbing himself with needles.:wink2: :geekon:

Religionists have done much worse self-mutilation for their religion!

Who said I was a drama whore?
http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj80/RonRules/Misc/060209_ashura_hmed_330a_hmedium.jpg

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj80/RonRules/Misc/fa42a08a-7d18-43cb-93ef-59d60d11ba6.jpg
I think most of these guys are cheating! Look, they hit their heads with the flat side of the blade. You just can trust religionists, they lie all the time!

Patricia Curtis

17th June 2009, 06:10 PM

<delete, no longer applicable>

EP - Ethics Particle

17th June 2009, 06:30 PM

Religionists have done much worse self-mutilation for their religion!

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj80/RonRules/Misc/060209_ashura_hmed_330a_hmedium.jpg

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj80/RonRules/Misc/fa42a08a-7d18-43cb-93ef-59d60d11ba6.jpg
Who said I was a drama whore?

Ya do NOT need a license ta be a damn fool! :no: :nervous: :duh:

EP

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 06:58 PM

Ya do NOT need a license ta be a damn fool! :no: :nervous: :duh:

EP

Referring to THEM in the pictures or me? :D

EP - Ethics Particle

17th June 2009, 07:10 PM

Ya do NOT need a license ta be a damn fool! :no: :nervous: :duh:

EP

Referring to THEM in the pictures or me? :D

Grandmother would mos' likely have said that you were a bit "reckless" on occasion. :eyeroll: :yes:

All cool.:thumbsup:

EP

ThisFenceHurts

17th June 2009, 08:19 PM

It better NOT mention GSR, because that would invalidate the whole use of e-meters as a method of measuring thoughts! Last time I checked, my hand skin did not have much to do with thinking.

E-meters measure conductivity. The postulate that this conductivity is affected by mental phenomena is what Scientologists base the meter's value upon. You disagree with the postulate that mental phenomena can affect conductivity.

E-meters do NOT measure thoughts. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what you are even protesting.

clamicide

17th June 2009, 08:28 PM

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 08:46 PM

E-meters measure conductivity. The postulate that this conductivity is affected by mental phenomena is what Scientologists base the meter's value upon. You disagree with the postulate that mental phenomena can affect conductivity.

E-meters do NOT measure thoughts. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what you are even protesting.

E-meters indeed measure conductivity, but MOST of the conductivity variations are due to GSR, not what you actually think. If you do a proper test, I posit that this is what you'll conclude.

I do think (although I could even be proven wrong on that) that if you are being startled or you're seeing a scary movie, or reading a scary passage in a book, the jolt of electrical conduction you feel through your body will probably be measured by the meter. (using the needles as electrodes)

I don't think that while you're searching your childhood under audition the meter will give reliable readings. The main source of fluctuations are from the hands.

The way to test that is with two meters hooked up simultaneously, one through cans and the other through the veins.

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 08:55 PM

Could someone send AO a frickin' Intro to the E-Meter book so he can at least harangue about what the Scios actually think the meter does?

Contrary tp the nice folks at CFI West who actually want to learn about the e-meter from scientologists, I don't care what the Scios think about it, because I'm pretty much certain that they've got it all wrong.

The e-meter, the way it is hooked up is a highly random device that produces results similar to Tarot cards. That's what I intend to show.

ThisFenceHurts

17th June 2009, 08:58 PM

E-meters indeed measure conductivity, but MOST of the conductivity variations are due to GSR, not what you actually think. If you do a proper test, I posit that this is what you'll conclude.

I do think (although I could even be proven wrong on that) that if you are being startled or you're seeing a scary movie, or reading a scary passage in a book, the jolt of electrical conduction you feel through your body will probably be measured by the meter.

I don't think that while you're searching your childhood under audition the meter will give reliable readings. The main source of fluctuations are from the hands.

The way to test that is with two meters hooked up simultaneously, one through cans and the other through the veins.

OK. I'm going back to the pinch test. What do you feel causes the needle motions after the initial pinch, when you are recalling the pinch? If you say your hands squeeze a little or sweat a little at the specific times you think about the pinch, then that would be thought influencing resistance via body motion. Not random at all.

I win.

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 09:00 PM

OK. I'm going back to the pinch test. What do you feel causes the needle motions after the initial pinch, when you are recalling the pinch? If you say your hands squeeze a little or sweat a little at the specific times you think about the pinch, then that would be thought influencing resistance via body motion. Not random at all.

I win.

That's why I want to do the pinch test with needles.

Then I'll win.

ThisFenceHurts

17th June 2009, 09:08 PM

That's why I want to do the pinch test with needles.

Then I'll win.

You really think needles will measure sweat?

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 09:14 PM

You really think needles will measure sweat?

No, not at all, which is why testing with needles is important.

In fact, I believe that with the needle test, you will not be seeing the needle movement on the "re-pinch" (thinking about being pinched).

If that's the result, the only remaining test for an e-meter is to throw it off a tall building to see how high it bounces off the ground.

ThisFenceHurts

17th June 2009, 09:24 PM

No, not at all, which is why testing with needles is important.

In fact, I believe that with the needle test, you will not be seeing the needle movement on the "re-pinch" (thinking about being pinched).

If that's the result, the only remaining test for an e-meter is to throw it off a tall building to see how high it bounces off the ground.

Good, I am glad you said that. I tricked you into showing that you do not understand what you are trying to test. Mean? Yes. So you posit that there are different physiological reactions in the body depending on where the measurement is taken. Since no one is arguing that the meter measures anything other than changes in conductivity as measured in the hands, that's neither here nor there.

But you offer no explanation for what would be causing the manifestations on the hands when the pinch is recalled AT THE EXACT MOMENT OF THE RECALL. Tell me again what exactly the mechanism is that you think causes the conductivity in the hands to change at the moment of recall?

Sweat? Why did the guy suddenly start sweating when he thought of the pinch?

Muscle clenching? Why did the guy suddenly have muscle clenching when he thought of the pinch?

Random fluctuations unrelated to anything relevant? Then why does the needle move in a predictable fashion exactly upon moment of recall, in a similar and diminishing pattern recall after recall? That would not be random, would it?

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 09:33 PM

Sweat? Why did the guy suddenly start sweating when he thought of the pinch?

No, that's too slow. But it would alow the meter reading to slowly fall to the right.

Muscle clenching? Why did the guy suddenly have muscle clenching when he thought of the pinch?

Yes.

But, realize that scientology denies that's it's muscle clenching. They claim it's what's happening INSIDE your body. Thetans and what not.

The needle test will sort this out.

Zinjifar

17th June 2009, 09:36 PM

You don't know what you're talking about AO. Neither in how GSR works nor what Scientologists 'believe' as to how the e-meter functions.

Zinj

ThisFenceHurts

17th June 2009, 09:47 PM

No, that's too slow. But it would alow the meter reading to slowly fall to the right.

Yes.

But, realize that scientology denies that's it's muscle clenching. They claim it's what's happening INSIDE your body. Thetans and what not.

The needle test will sort this out.

Good, we are getting somewhere. You are really simply protesting that thoughts/BTs/etc are physical things residing inside the body. I agree with you on this that they are not. I don't know very many Scientologists who think anything is happening inside their body in regards to these things. Those that do are the ones who have apparently not studied what Scientology technical bulletins have to say on the matter.

Scientology teaches that "thought", "engrams", etc. impinge upon the body in such a way as to effect changes in the resistance as measured via the hands. The exact "location" of these items is not explicity or clearly stated, but that is not important. The fact that thinking of some things changes the resistance, while thinking of other things does not, IS what is important. If a meter can determine what changes resistance and what doesn't, it is valuable.

So, again, you are arguing against a position that is simply not an accurate description of what Scientologists believe. I think that is called a straw man fallacy.

AnonOrange

17th June 2009, 09:53 PM

ThisFenceHurts

17th June 2009, 10:12 PM

Why do they call them "Body Thetans" !

I just want to eliminate the main error variable, the cans.

In this thread, people say that the grip on the cans does not matter and the auditor is able to tell the difference. I don't think that's true.

Maybe you don't know this, but body thetans are not referred to until the OT Levels. They are not called body thetans because they are physical pieces of matter embedded into a body. The majority of auditing that takes place in Scientology has nothing to do with them. So if that is your rationale for why meters are useless and why auditing must not work, then you are really not getting what Scientology is about. This is why people tell you that you need to read up more about Scientology and why you come across as uninformed.

Regarding grip on cans...yes, it makes a difference. A loose grip will affect conductivity as will a tight grip. I agree that the meter will change based on how tightly one is squeezing the cans. However, the meter is measuring RELATIVE changes in conductivity. It doesn't really matter what the baseline conductivity is, just that it remains relatively constant during the question or conversation, or what have you. It does change due to sweat and tempaerature changes gradually over time, and there are adjustments that are made to account for this. If a person squeezes and unsqueezes the cans all over the place, it will affect the needle. No one denies that. You don't believe someone can be trained to spot this, and I believe they can. You would need some experience watching a needle to be able to speak coherently on the subject. I'm sorry if that comes across as condescending, but it is not. You are simply making wild claims based on what you decided from looking at a meter without any regard for what role it actually plays in Scientology.

Also, the way you use the word "variable" when describing cans isn't really accurate. Where conductivity is tested in the body is also a variable. If you tested skin conductivity with cans and with another measurement device, you'd have a variable where the cans are concerned.

uniquemand

17th June 2009, 10:35 PM

Markus

17th June 2009, 10:46 PM

http://www.lermanet.com/exit/emetercases.htm

Here are some quotes from this trial.......

"UNITED STATES of America, Libelant, v. An ARTICLE OR DEVICE

. . . "HUBBARD ELECTROMETER" or "Hubbard E-Meter," etc.,

Founding Church of Scientology et al., Claimants

No. D.C. 1-63

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

333 F. Supp. 357; 1971 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12206

July 30, 1971

CORE TERMS: religious, church, auditing, scientific, dianetic, illness, secular, religion, cure, claimant, intelligence, First Amendment, non-religious, labeling, psycho-somatic, disease, misbranding, seized, distributed, processing, counseling, condemned, radiation, exact, misrepresentation, adherents, pamphlet, purport, harmless, bona fide

JUDGES: [**1]

Gesell, District Judge.

OPINIONBY: GESELL

OPINION: [*358] MEMORANDUM OPINION

GESELL, District Judge.

This is an action by the United States seeking nationwide condemnation of a gadget known as an E-meter and related writings, by libel of information under the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq. The E-meter is claimed to be a device within the meaning of the [*359] Act. Misbranding and lack of adequate directions for use are alleged. Claimants are the Founding Church of Scientology and various individuals.

This suit was originally tried to a jury before another Judge of this Court and the conviction there obtained was reversed on appeal after a long trial because of certain First Amendment problems suggested by the instructions and evidentiary rulings. Founding Church of Scientology v. United States, 133 U.S. App. D.C. 229, 409 F.2d 1146 (1969). The present trial was conducted to the Court without a jury after a series of pretrials which narrowed the issues. The record consists of the transcript and exhibits taken at the prior trial with some additions and deletions, plus the testimony of one additional witness who testified further on religious aspects of [**2] the case. Many of the background facts are set forth in the opinion of the Court of Appeals and since they were in the main not contested at the second trial they need not all be repeated here.

The E-meter is essentially a simple galvanometer using two tin cans as electrodes. It is crude, battery-powered, and designed to measure electrical skin resistance. It is completely harmless and ineffective in itself. A person using the meter for treatment holds the tin cans in his hands during an interview with the operator who is known as an auditor and who purports to read indicators from the galvanometer needle as it notes reactions to questions. Scientology is a so-called exact science which promotes auditing. When practiced by trained or untrained persons, Scientology auditing is claimed to improve the health, intelligence, ability, behavior, skill and appearance of the individual treated.

L. Ron Hubbard, writing in a science fiction magazine in the 1940's, first advanced the extravagant false claims that various physical and mental illnesses could be cured by auditing. He played a major part in developing Scientology. Thereafter, commencing in the early 1950's numerous Scientology [**3] books and pamphlets were written explaining how various illnesses can be and had been cured through auditing. These materials were widely distributed. Hubbard, who wrote much of the material, is a facile, prolific author and his quackery flourished throughout the United States and in various parts of the world. He was supported by other pamphleteers and adherents who also promoted the practice of Scientology and touted its alleged benefits.

Hubbard and his fellow Scientologists developed the notion of using an E-meter to aid auditing. Substantial fees were charged for the meter and for auditing sessions using the meter. They repeatedly and explicitly represented that such auditing effectuated cures of many physical and mental illnesses. An individual processed with the aid of the E-meter was said to reach the intended goal of "clear" and was led to believe there was reliable scientific proof that once cleared many, indeed most illnesses would automatically be cured. Auditing was guaranteed to be successful. All this was and is false -- in short, a fraud. Contrary to representations made, there is absolutely no scientific or medical basis in fact for the claimed cures attributed [**4] to E-meter auditing.

Unfortunately the Government did not move to stop the practice of Scientology and a related "science" known as Dianetics when these activities first appeared and were gaining public acceptance. Had it done so, this tedious litigation would not have been necessary. The Government did not sue to condemn the E-meter until the early 1960's, by which time a religious cult known as the Founding Church of Scientology had appeared. This religion, formally organized in 1955, existed side-by-side with the secular practice of Scientology. Its adherents embrace many of Hubbard's teachings and widely disseminate his writings. The Church purports to believe that many illnesses may be cured through E-meter auditing by its trained ministers through an appeal to the spirit or soul of a man. As a matter of formal doctrine, the Church professes to have [*360] abandoned any contention that there is a scientific basis for claiming cures resulting from E-meter use. The Church, however, continued widely to circulate Scientology literature such as Government's exhibits 16 and 31, which hold out false scientific and medical promises of certain cure for many types of illnesses. [**5] n1

n1 The issues have been tried as of January, 1963, the date of the libel. Thus the findings as to Scientology literature and positions of the claimants do not necessarily reflect current conditions.

In 1962, when the Government seized the E-meters involved in the present controversy, it took them from the premises of the Church, confiscating some E-meters which were actually then being used primarily by ministers of the Church to audit adherents or to train auditors for subsequent church activity. Thus the Government put itself in the delicate position of moving against not only secular uses of the E-meter but other uses purporting to be religious, and the Court accordingly confronts the necessity of reconciling the requirements of the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act prohibiting misbranding and the requirements of the First Amendment protecting religious institutions and religious beliefs from governmental interference under the First Amendment.

The Court of Appeals has ruled that the evidence at the prior trial [**6] and reintroduced at this trial established prima facie that the Founding Church of Scientology, the principal claimant here, is a bona fide religion and that the auditing practice of Scientology and accounts of it are religious doctrine. No evidence to the contrary was offered by the Government on the second trial. Accordingly, for purposes of this particular case only, claimant must be deemed to have met its burden of establishing First Amendment standing for whatever significance the religious practice of Scientology may have on the outcome of this particular litigation."

........

"The bulk of the material is replete with false medical and scientific claims devoid of any religious overlay or reference. Two books which the Church especially recommended to interested participants, "Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought" (Government Ex. 31), and "The Problems of Work" (Government Ex. 103), are typical examples of books containing false scientific non-religious claims. Examples of such claims found in these and a few other representative documents used in various direct and indirect ways to promote E-meter auditing are listed in Appendix A."

..............

"The device should bear a prominent, clearly visible notice warning that any person using it for auditing or counseling of any kind is forbidden by law to represent that there is any medical or scientific basis for believing or asserting that the device is useful in the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease. It should be noted in the warning that the device has been condemned by a United States District Court for misrepresentation and misbranding under [**21] the Food and Drug laws, that use is permitted only as part of religious activity, and that the E-meter is not medically or scientifically capable of improving the health or bodily functions of anyone.

Each user, purchaser, and distributee of the E-meter shall sign a written statement that he has read such warning and understands its contents and such statements shall be preserved.

Any and all literature which refers to the E-meter or to auditing, including advertisements, distributed directly or indirectly by the seller or distributor of the E-meter or by anyone utilizing or promoting the use of the E-meter, should bear a prominent notice printed in or permanently affixed to each item or such literature, stating that the device known as a Hubbard Electrometer, or E-meter, used in auditing, has been condemned by [*365] a United States District Court on the grounds that the literature of Dianetics and Scientology contains false and misleading claims of a medical or scientific nature and that the E-meter has no proven usefulness in the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease, nor is it medically or scientifically capable of improving any bodily function. Where the notice [**22] is printed in or affixed to literature, it should appear either on the outside front cover or on the title page in letters no smaller than 11-point type. As far as I know this part here was simply ignored by the church of Scientology for 38 years now or am I wrong on this?
The E-meter should not be sold to any person or used in any counseling of any person except pursuant to a written contract, signed by the purchaser or counselee, which includes, among other things, a prominent notification as specified immediately above.

The effect of this judgment will be to eliminate the E-meter as far as further secular use by Scientologists or others is concerned. E-meter auditing will be permitted only in a religious setting subject to placing explicit warning disclaimers on the meter itself and on all labeling. The Government has requested an opportunity to show that complete forfeiture and destruction of the E-meter is required, but the Court has concluded that however desirable this may be in the public interest, the Court is without power to so order in view of the protections afforded claimant and others similarly situated under the First Amendment."

Love

Markus

uniquemand

17th June 2009, 11:05 PM

Yep, medical claims for the value of auditing haven't ever been born out. The meter doesn't do anything other than measure changes in the bodies resistance to a small current of electricity passed through it. However, it DOES do that.

ThisFenceHurts

17th June 2009, 11:33 PM

Grip on the cans, is, of course, a variable. It's just that the auditor is trained to correct for it. I forget the name of the e-meter drill, but you spend hours having people squish their hands around, let go, cross their fingers, etc.. The idea is that you learn to spot the differences between a "real read" and a "body read".

Exactly. The needle behavior for someone doing the above is visibly different than that of a person keeping a basically steady grip. Whether that means that the "real read" is valuable for purposes of therapy is a matter of opinion.

AnonOrange

18th June 2009, 05:54 AM

Yep, medical claims for the value of auditing haven't ever been born out.

Well, tell me then why Scientology staff (as of a week ago at a stress table) offered MEDICAL diagnosis and treatements as well as PSYCHOLOGICAL diagnosis and treatements. Duing the session, there was not the slightest mention of spirituality, gods or morals. They were ready to offer me medical services and the price was $700/12.5 hours X 4 weeks per month, until I got better :melodramatic:

They also clearly told me to get off prozac, which is highly illegal for them to say. (I'm not on prozac, but made them think I was) I have everything on video and I'm preparing a package for the Orange County district attorney. :yes:

Hi OSA! :D

The meter doesn't do anything other than measure changes in the bodies resistance to a small current of electricity passed through it. However, it DOES do that.

Wait before saying that until I test them meter hooked up to the blood veins. From what I read, the meter will stay steady.

Ted

18th June 2009, 12:41 PM

Well, tell me then why Scientology staff (as of a week ago at a stress table) offered MEDICAL diagnosis and treatements as well as PSYCHOLOGICAL diagnosis and treatements. Duing the session, there was not the slightest mention of spirituality, gods or morals. They were ready to offer me medical services and the price was $700/12.5 hours X 4 weeks per month, until I got better :melodramatic:

They also clearly told me to get off prozac, which is highly illegal for them to say. (I'm not on prozac, but made them think I was) I have everything on video and I'm preparing a package for the Orange County district attorney. :yes:

Hi OSA! :D

Wait before saying that until I test them meter hooked up to the blood veins. From what I read, the meter will stay steady.

Scientology staffs are likely newbs for the most part, untrained in actual philosophy and procedure. You have greater access to experienced, knowledgeable Scientologists right here on ESMB.

I predict that there is not enough surface area on needles to give you any kind of a read other than a stuck needle. Have a go with railroad spikes through the palms of your hands. :thumbsup:

AnonOrange

18th June 2009, 03:57 PM

Scientology staffs are likely newbs for the most part, untrained in actual philosophy and procedure. You have greater access to experienced, knowledgeable Scientologists right here on ESMB.

The person that did the test was the oldest there, approximately 55, and had been a scientologist for many years.

Scientology right now is desperate to get fresh meat.

alex

18th June 2009, 04:20 PM

Well, tell me then why Scientology staff (as of a week ago at a stress table) offered MEDICAL diagnosis and treatements as well as PSYCHOLOGICAL diagnosis and treatements. Duing the session, there was not the slightest mention of spirituality, gods or morals. They were ready to offer me medical services and the price was $700/12.5 hours X 4 weeks per month, until I got better :melodramatic:

They also clearly told me to get off prozac, which is highly illegal for them to say. (I'm not on prozac, but made them think I was) I have everything on video and I'm preparing a package for the Orange County district attorney. :yes:

Hi OSA! :D

Wait before saying that until I test them meter hooked up to the blood veins. From what I read, the meter will stay steady.

Interesting that you now believe there are ILLEGAL THINGS TO SAY.

Who is the decidificator of such? You?

Shudder! :nervous:

(and by the way, what org is offering intensives at $700 each? I havent seen that price in several decades!)

AnonOrange

18th June 2009, 05:21 PM

Interesting that you now believe there are ILLEGAL THINGS TO SAY.

Who is the decidificator of such? You?

Shudder! :nervous:

(and by the way, what org is offering intensives at $700 each? I havent seen that price in several decades!)

2053.5.

1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person who complies with the requirements of Section 2053.6 shall not be in violation of Section 2051, 2052, or 2053 unless that person does any of the following:
1. Conducts surgery or any other procedure on another person that punctures the skin or harmfully invades the body.
2. Administers or prescribes x-ray radiation to another person.
3. Prescribes or administers legend drugs or controlled substances to another person.
4. Recommends the discontinuance of legend drugs or controlled substances prescribed by an appropriately licensed practitioner.
5. Willfully diagnoses and treats a physical or mental condition of any person under circumstances or conditions that cause or create risk of great bodily harm, serious physical or mental illness, or death.
6. Sets fractures.
7. Treats lacerations or abrasions through electrotherapy.
8. Holds out, states, indicates, advertises, or implies to a client or prospective client that he or she is a physician, a surgeon, or a physician and surgeon.
2. A person who advertises any services that are not unlawful under Section 2051, 2052, or 2053 pursuant to subdivision (a) shall disclose in the advertisement that he or she is not licensed by the state as a healing arts practitioner.

As far as the $700 price, I didn't even start negociating ! They were clearly desparate for my business.

Hey Alex, you probably have an e-meter would would be able to explain it's functioning. Can you be in LA with it on Saturday?

alex

18th June 2009, 05:24 PM

2053.5.

1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person who complies with the requirements of Section 2053.6 shall not be in violation of Section 2051, 2052, or 2053 unless that person does any of the following:
1. Conducts surgery or any other procedure on another person that punctures the skin or harmfully invades the body.
2. Administers or prescribes x-ray radiation to another person.
3. Prescribes or administers legend drugs or controlled substances to another person.
4. Recommends the discontinuance of legend drugs or controlled substances prescribed by an appropriately licensed practitioner.
5. Willfully diagnoses and treats a physical or mental condition of any person under circumstances or conditions that cause or create risk of great bodily harm, serious physical or mental illness, or death.
6. Sets fractures.
7. Treats lacerations or abrasions through electrotherapy.
8. Holds out, states, indicates, advertises, or implies to a client or prospective client that he or she is a physician, a surgeon, or a physician and surgeon.
2. A person who advertises any services that are not unlawful under Section 2051, 2052, or 2053 pursuant to subdivision (a) shall disclose in the advertisement that he or she is not licensed by the state as a healing arts practitioner.

As far as the $700 price, I didn't even start negociating ! They were clearly desparate for my business.

Hey Alex, you probably have an e-meter would would be able to explain it's functioning. Can you be in LA with it on Saturday?

I will be in socal sunday, but sorry, no game.

You are quoting law out of context and without reference to applicability.

AnonOrange

18th June 2009, 05:40 PM

I will be in socal sunday, but sorry, no game.

You are quoting law out of context and without reference to applicability.

It's totally applicable. I had a long discussion with the police divison commander, who was actually familiar with the law. I had asked to have an arrest made, but he advised against it, simply because there was no money exchanged. He said to take everything to the DA. I have a nice little package ready. I've also contacted the medical boards, APA and soon the FDA.

Hi OSA!

alex

18th June 2009, 06:05 PM

It's totally applicable. I had a long discussion with the police divison commander, who was actually familiar with the law. I had asked to have an arrest made, but he advised against it, simply because there was no money exchanged. He said to take everything to the DA. I have a nice little package ready. I've also contacted the medical boards, APA and soon the FDA.

Hi OSA!

You make OSA's job so easy, poisoning the field around you for when real criminal complaints would be planted.

The anon who cried wolf. I'd almost suspect you of BEING osa on a reverse op!

CornPie

18th June 2009, 06:09 PM

You [AnonOrange] make OSA's job so easy, poisoning the field around you for when real criminal complaints would be planted.

The anon who cried wolf. I'd almost suspect you of BEING osa on a reverse op!
Hey AnonOrange:

1. Alex just acused me of being an OSA op too -- on post #124 of this thread:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=11792

2. Also, while doing your emeter tests -- if you notice any Body Thetans attached to energy fields, would you please upload some videos to YouTube.

On that post #16 of this thread Alex said, "Body thetans are not in your body. They are attached by thier energy fields to others energy fields, which can correspond roughly to the space of "the body" but is not the same thing."

alex

18th June 2009, 06:27 PM

Hey AnonOrange:

1. Alex just acused me of being an OSA op too -- on post #124 of this thread:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=11792

2. Also, while doing your emeter tests -- if you notice any Body Thetans attached to energy fields, could you upload some pictures to YouTube.

See Alex's comments in post #16 of THIS thread, the thread you are reading now,

Alex said, "Body thetans are not in your body. They are attached by thier energy fields to others energy fields, which can correspond roughly to the space of "the body" but is not the same thing."

You DO know what the symbolism of Orange is in scientology don't you CORNPIE?

:roflmao:

Dulloldfart

18th June 2009, 06:46 PM

You DO know what the symbolism of Orange is in scientology don't you CORNPIE?

:roflmao:

Huh? I don't. Guess I should lurk moar.

Paul

AnonOrange

18th June 2009, 08:42 PM

You DO know what the symbolism of Orange is in scientology don't you CORNPIE?

:roflmao:

I really don't either! Please tell, because my anon name was just a coincidence.

The funny thing though, when I had the stress test, the auditor brought up oranges totally out of the blue. I really had to hold back the laughs.

If Alex continues to call you OSA, report it to XENU!

alex

18th June 2009, 10:57 PM

I really don't either! Please tell, because my anon name was just a coincidence.

The funny thing though, when I had the stress test, the auditor brought up oranges totally out of the blue. I really had to hold back the laughs.

If Alex continues to call you OSA, report it to XENU!

Um....Xenu is dead dude.

Zinjifar

18th June 2009, 11:36 PM

Um....Xenu is dead dude.

???

There *is* no 'death'. Aren't you a Scientologist?

Zinj

Lohan2008

19th June 2009, 12:10 AM

:confused2:
There *is* no 'death'. Aren't you a Scientologist?
Zinj

No Zinj, Alex is a "wannabe"
s/he joined CofS so that s/he could pay to have friends :laugh:

Markus

19th June 2009, 12:17 AM

...this is a very serious matter.

And no one has answered my question yet.....

"Any and all literature which refers to the E-meter or to auditing, including advertisements, distributed directly or indirectly by the seller or distributor of the E-meter or by anyone utilizing or promoting the use of the E-meter, should bear a prominent notice printed in or permanently affixed to each item or such literature, stating that the device known as a Hubbard Electrometer, or E-meter, used in auditing, has been condemned by [*365] a United States District Court on the grounds that the literature of Dianetics and Scientology contains false and misleading claims of a medical or scientific nature and that the E-meter has no proven usefulness in the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease, nor is it medically or scientifically capable of improving any bodily function. Where the notice [**22] is printed in or affixed to literature, it should appear either on the outside front cover or on the title page in letters no smaller than 11-point type." As far as I know the above part was simply ignored by the church of Scientology for 38 years now or am I wrong on this? It is on the E-Meter but not in the books.

"The E-meter should not be sold to any person or used in any counseling of any person except pursuant to a written contract, signed by the purchaser or counselee, which includes, among other things, a prominent notification as specified immediately above."

Well any answers now?

Love

Markus

Lohan2008

19th June 2009, 12:36 AM

:sigh: ... Markus in case you haven't noticed our elected public reposentitives don't move their b#tts UNLESS the :flames: of public opinion is firmly under it !

CofS has continued to ignore court orders because (previously) the have spent Millions to keep their name out of the media.

...this is a very serious matter.

And no one has answered my question yet.....

"Any and all literature which refers to the E-meter or to auditing, including advertisements, distributed directly or indirectly by the seller or distributor of the E-meter or by anyone utilizing or promoting the use of the E-meter, should bear a prominent notice printed in or permanently affixed to each item or such literature, stating that the device known as a Hubbard Electrometer, or E-meter, used in auditing, has been condemned by [*365] a United States District Court on the grounds that the literature of Dianetics and Scientology contains false and misleading claims of a medical or scientific nature and that the E-meter has no proven usefulness in the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease, nor is it medically or scientifically capable of improving any bodily function. Where the notice [**22] is printed in or affixed to literature, it should appear either on the outside front cover or on the title page in letters no smaller than 11-point type." As far as I know the above part was simply ignored by the church of Scientology for 38 years now or am I wrong on this? It is on the E-Meter but not in the books.

"The E-meter should not be sold to any person or used in any counseling of any person except pursuant to a written contract, signed by the purchaser or counselee, which includes, among other things, a prominent notification as specified immediately above."

Well any answers now?

Love

Markus

Dulloldfart

19th June 2009, 12:45 AM

CofS has continued to ignore court orders because (previously) they have spent Millions to keep their name out of the media.

They should demand a refund. :)

Paul

Markus

19th June 2009, 12:55 AM

AnonOrange

19th June 2009, 02:05 AM

Markus

19th June 2009, 02:14 AM

Both 13Heathans and myself noticed a small gold plate at the bootom of the e-meter, but it is engraved very shallow and very difficult to read. Both he and I could not read it from a reasonable distance. Mind you we didn't have much time to look at it.

"Any and all literature which refers to the E-meter or to auditing, including advertisements, distributed directly or indirectly by the seller or distributor of the E-meter or by anyone utilizing or promoting the use of the E-meter, should bear a prominent notice printed in or permanently affixed to each item or such literature, stating that the device known as a Hubbard Electrometer, or E-meter, used in auditing, has been condemned by [*365] a United States District Court on the grounds that the literature of Dianetics and Scientology contains false and misleading claims of a medical or scientific nature and that the E-meter has no proven usefulness in the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease, nor is it medically or scientifically capable of improving any bodily function. Where the notice [**22] is printed in or affixed to literature, it should appear either on the outside front cover or on the title page in letters no smaller than 11-point type." As far as I know the above part was simply ignored by the church of Scientology for 38 years now or am I wrong on this? It is on the E-Meter but not in the books.

"The E-meter should not be sold to any person or used in any counseling of any person except pursuant to a written contract, signed by the purchaser or counselee, which includes, among other things, a prominent notification as specified immediately above."

AO I wanted to point out here that they ignored it for the books and writings.
They did it on the E-Meter many many years ago.

Love

Markus

Eddie

19th June 2009, 10:26 AM

"Any and all literature which refers to the E-meter or to auditing, including advertisements, distributed directly or indirectly by the seller or distributor of the E-meter or by anyone utilizing or promoting the use of the E-meter, should bear a prominent notice printed in or permanently affixed to each item or such literature, stating that the device known as a Hubbard Electrometer, or E-meter, used in auditing, has been condemned by [*365] a United States District Court on the grounds that the literature of Dianetics and Scientology contains false and misleading claims of a medical or scientific nature and that the E-meter has no proven usefulness in the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease, nor is it medically or scientifically capable of improving any bodily function. Where the notice [**22] is printed in or affixed to literature, it should appear either on the outside front cover or on the title page in letters no smaller than 11-point type." As far as I know the above part was simply ignored by the church of Scientology for 38 years now or am I wrong on this? It is on the E-Meter but not in the books.

"The E-meter should not be sold to any person or used in any counseling of any person except pursuant to a written contract, signed by the purchaser or counselee, which includes, among other things, a prominent notification as specified immediately above."

AO I wanted to point out here that they ignored it for the books and writings.
They did it on the E-Meter many many years ago.

Love

Markus

Is there such a warning in DMSMH these days (my copy is from 56)? That is certainly literature that refers to auditing.

Maybe that is the reason for the re-release of all the books. DM reaslised they forgot to include this disclaimer.

uniquemand

19th June 2009, 10:36 AM

The prohibition has to do with claims made for the emeter doing anything. It has nothing to do with auditing.

Eddie

19th June 2009, 11:17 AM

That is not the way it reads.

"Any and all literature which refers to the E-meter or to auditing..."

The wording is quite clear.

ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn

19th June 2009, 11:56 AM

http://www.gadgetvortex.com/images/SI512-MI.JPG

You can pick one of these up for under $10 USD on-line

BioTouch Interactive Mood Light $9.95 Search for SI512BLU

It's a little more sophisticated and advanced than an e-meter, but basically does the same thing.

Markus

19th June 2009, 11:37 PM

That is not the way it reads.

"Any and all literature which refers to the E-meter or to auditing..."

The wording is quite clear.

You are right! The wording is quite clear!:yes: :whistling:

Markus

alex

19th June 2009, 11:54 PM

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,900653,00.html

"Food and Drug Administration agents who raided the headquarters of an organization known as the Founding Church of Scientology six years ago confiscated neither food nor drugs. Instead, they carted off books, pamphlets, and a collection of electronic gadgets called E-meters. In court, the Government said that the literature had made misleading statements about the machines' curative powers and had thus violated the fed eral law against improper labeling. A federal jury agreed. Last week, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., reversed that decision.

Until the Government can refute the claim that Scientology is a religion, said the court, the E-meters and their accompanying leaflets are protected from seizure by the right of freedom of worship—which puts them beyond the reach of the FDA.

Scientology's founder, L. Ron Hubbard, 57, is an evangelist who contends that his E-meters can not only detect unhealthy habit patterns that he calls "engrams," but can also pick up subtle emanations from such inanimate objects as a tomato (TIME, Aug. 23). As part of the "audit," a person holds two soup cans that are connected to the E-meter, a crude galvanometer that supposedly translates slight variations in voltage into a measurement of emotional reaction. The interviews, which are conducted by trained Scientologists, sound like a cross between psychoanalysis and an encounter with a Zen master, all in the language of computer technology. To reach an advanced stage of enlightenment may cost a believer as much as $15,000 for tuition, equipment and lodging at Scientology centers.

In the decision, Judge J. Skelly Wright pointed out that, from the Scientologists' point of view, the "auditing or processing is a central practice of their religion, akin to confession in the Catholic Church." Furthermore, said Wright, Scientology's leaders claim that the E-meter is not used to diagnose or treat physical disease. They insist that they are treating the spirit, and through the spirit, hope to cure the body.

In the absence of proof to the contrary, said Wright, the literature accompanying the E-meters must be treated as Scripture. To bolster his opinion, Judge Wright pointed out that Hubbard's organization is incorporated as a church in the District of Columbia and that its ministers are even qualified to perform marriages and burial rites."

--------------

I think though if you review the current literature you will find the appropriate verbage, and when you buy the meter, you sign the papers indicating you have also read it. This is one of the reasons the church can have ebay remove meters from auctions....the requirement for the signed attestation to have read the warning that is the current practice, and federal government requirement.

alex

19th June 2009, 11:59 PM

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/E-Meter/Mark-VII/data-plate.jpeg

bad photography, as it can be easily read in normal conditions.

ThisFenceHurts

20th June 2009, 07:53 PM

Interesting that you now believe there are ILLEGAL THINGS TO SAY.

Who is the decidificator of such? You?

Shudder! :nervous:

(and by the way, what org is offering intensives at $700 each? I havent seen that price in several decades!)

You don't seriously believe that freedom of speech means freedom to say whatever you like to anyone at any time, do you?

Dulloldfart

20th June 2009, 08:42 PM

Saturday 20 June has arrived. Did you get anyone to show up, AO?

Paul

AnonOrange

25th June 2009, 07:15 PM

Can someone bring an e-meter (or two preferably) to BFG's party this weekend?

I'll bring the needles !

Dulloldfart

25th June 2009, 07:20 PM

Can someone bring an e-meter (or two preferably) to BFG's party this weekend?

Yes please. And a video camera. Let's see if AO can be persuaded to sit still for ten minutes and play ball and get some idea of what a meter is really used for. :)

I know it is easy for AO to be filmed showing how it doesn't do various things too.

Paul

CornPie

25th June 2009, 11:56 PM

Can someone bring an e-meter (or two preferably) to BFG's party this weekend? -- I'll bring the needles !
Hey AO, what happened at the e-meter gig last weekend? I lost track of this story in all the commotion.

AnonOrange

26th June 2009, 12:08 AM

Alanzo

26th June 2009, 02:13 AM

Nobody showed up with an e-meter !

Hopefully this weekend someone will. It won't take much time 5-10 minutes.

BTW, I just went to buy gold needles, antisceptic, alchool pads, a touniquet and spoke to a nurse that thinks I'm crazy.

Not a big deal !

Dude.

You can't be a militant for one side ONLY and do a fair evaluation or experiment of something.

You have to allow for the possibility of the thing you find Evil and Untrue.

Will you promise me that you will do that?

Just allow for the possibility of it?

programmer_guy

26th June 2009, 06:02 AM

Nobody showed up with an e-meter !

Hopefully this weekend someone will. It won't take much time 5-10 minutes.

BTW, I just went to buy gold needles, antisceptic, alchool pads, a touniquet and spoke to a nurse that thinks I'm crazy.

Not a big deal !

I don't mind what you want to do.

Here is my suggestion (not necessarily in this order):

1. do what you are planning to do with the needles or can squeezing or whatever else you have in mind,

2. try complete cooperation with a trained SCN auditor. (Maybe try some questions about your arrest and other related items.)

Report the results of #1 and #2 here on this thread. It might be interesting.

BTW, if you have extremely dry hands (like if you work in a chem lab) you might need to use foot plates instead of cans.

Zinjifar

26th June 2009, 05:00 PM

As far as I've been able to discern, AO's desire is to 'debunk' the e-meter by 'proving' that all needle reaction is a result of can squeeze and sweat, which, since GSR even in non-Scientology applications is *not* only a result of those factors isn't likely to prove much.

Yes, 'can squeeze' and body movement will affect needle motion, and, yes, I tend to think that the general belief that an auditor can 'spot' such things all the time is just an additional bit of Scientology Certainty.

But, GSR is *not* about sweat or conductivity alone, but about changes to resistance in lower skin layers that do indeed reflect changes in the mental situation. So, AO should be better defining and designing his 'test'. I'm not sure what it is exactly he's trying to prove.

However, a common belief among Scientologists seems to me to be that the current from the e-meter actually travels over the nervous system and therefore through the brain, which is just physiologically silly, but, *would* be testable.

Whatever it is AO seems to want to 'test' and 'debunk' seems to be completely irrelevant to anything in Scientology belief.

Maybe he should just switch to asking a catholic priest for a consecrated host in order to have it DNA tested so he can 'debunk' transsubstantiation?

'No, no human body there!'

Zinj

ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn

26th June 2009, 05:09 PM

Zinjifar

26th June 2009, 05:20 PM

I don't think he'll have must success finding a catholic priest crazy enough to claim his brand of mythology is based on scientific fact like Sceintologists do.

I think that's at least one of the points. What AO seems to want to 'test' isn't part of any Scientology 'belief'. Instead, his interest seems to be in debunking Galvanic Skin Response, which he's going to have a tough time doing, since a) it *has* been scientifically tested and b) AO seems to have some confusion on how it actually works, so, he's unlikely to be able to set up any kind of workable 'test'.

Where the 'e-meter Tech' of Scientology leaps from perfectly reasonable GSR usage to 'divinatory' pseudo-science is in the *meaning* of the needle movements, which is pure hokum and akin to entrail or tea leaf reading. But, to debunk such divination it's not necessary to disprove the existence of tea leaves or entrails, but to disprove any correlation between them and 'reality'.

Zinj

ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn

26th June 2009, 05:39 PM

I think that's at least one of the points. What AO seems to want to 'test' isn't part of any Scientology 'belief'. Instead, his interest seems to be in debunking Galvanic Skin Response, which he's going to have a tough time doing, since a) it *has* been scientifically tested and b) AO seems to have some confusion on how it actually works, so, he's unlikely to be able to set up any kind of workable 'test'.

Where the 'e-meter Tech' of Scientology leaps from perfectly reasonable GSR usage to 'divinatory' pseudo-science is in the *meaning* of the needle movements, which is pure hokum and akin to entrail or tea leaf reading. But, to debunk such divination it's not necessary to disprove the existence of tea leaves or entrails, but to disprove any correlation between them and 'reality'.

Zinj

I think a better experiment would be to measure galvanic skin response after taking drugs that alter your brain chemistry, I bet if you blast a few rails of cocaine, you can get that needle to wave at you a lot quicker than Hubbard's hypnotic trance takes to do.

AnonOrange

26th June 2009, 09:27 PM

I think that's at least one of the points. What AO seems to want to 'test' isn't part of any Scientology 'belief'. Instead, his interest seems to be in debunking Galvanic Skin Response, which he's going to have a tough time doing, since a) it *has* been scientifically tested and b) AO seems to have some confusion on how it actually works, so, he's unlikely to be able to set up any kind of workable 'test'.

I'm back from the Ollie raid, but he was a no show. I did talk to him on the phone though :).

Anyway, I do NOT want to debung Galvanic Skin Response. That's a well established fact. What I want to show is that the meters' response is ONLY due to skin response, which includes grip pressure and sweat.

By having needles in the veins, I can directly measure body conduction, which is what scientologists claim to measure.

I really don't know what's so difficult to understand about that. Why has this never been tested?

Well someone bring me an e-meter --- please !

Zinjifar

26th June 2009, 09:41 PM

By having needles in the veins, I can directly measure body conduction, which is what scientologists claim to measure.

*No*
They don't.

*Some* Scientologists, who are generally committing the crime of 'Verbal Tech' have expressed some bizarre theories about how the current goes over the nerves through the brain bla bla, but, that is *not* a part of Scientology claims or 'Tech'.

Zinj

AnonOrange

26th June 2009, 10:11 PM

*No*
They don't.

*Some* Scientologists, who are generally committing the crime of 'Verbal Tech' have expressed some bizarre theories about how the current goes over the nerves through the brain bla bla, but, that is *not* a part of Scientology claims or 'Tech'.

Zinj

Please explain what the hell is the meter supposed to measure if not the conduction through the body? I could probably line up 10 scientologists that will say that.

Please provide source for your counter-claims.

Dulloldfart

26th June 2009, 10:35 PM

Remember this thread, AO?
http://forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=11119&page=6

Paul

Ted

27th June 2009, 12:45 AM

I'm back from the Ollie raid, but he was a no show. I did talk to him on the phone though :).

Anyway, I do NOT want to debung Galvanic Skin Response. That's a well established fact. What I want to show is that the meters' response is ONLY due to skin response, which includes grip pressure and sweat.

By having needles in the veins, I can directly measure body conduction, which is what scientologists claim to measure.

I really don't know what's so difficult to understand about that. Why has this never been tested?

Well someone bring me an e-meter --- please !

AO, it's called Galvanic Skin Response. Skin, get it? Skin

What's so hard to understand about that? :eyeroll:

Dulloldfart

27th June 2009, 12:52 AM

What's so hard to understand about that? :eyeroll:

Well yeah, but not all skin is the same. Fingertip skin works great and thigh skin doesn't. Do you know the parameters Ted? It might be density of nerve endings, but maybe not. It's not density of sweat glands (see linked thread for research data).

Paul

AnonOrange

27th June 2009, 01:13 AM

AO, it's called Galvanic Skin Response. Skin, get it? Skin

What's so hard to understand about that? :eyeroll:

Jesus H. Christ, I know that. What I keep on telling you guys is that the e-meter supposedly measures the conduction INSIDE the body. My test will disprove that.

Then, scientology can close down and we'll all be happy.

AnonOrange

27th June 2009, 01:16 AM

I just realized we have a freshly dead corpse to test the Thethan story ! You know who I'm talking about, right?

As the body Thetans leave MJ's body, that $20,000 e-meter should surely be able to measure that.

AnonOrange

27th June 2009, 01:40 AM

Remember this thread, AO?
http://forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=11119&page=6

Paul

I was unaware of that thread. Thanks.

I followed one of the links (http://rulings.cbp.gov/index.asp?ru=w563475&qu=xxx&vw=detail), which was a discussion with US Customs. Look what it says:

"The devices under consideration in this case are manufactured in Taiwan and are referred to as "E-Meters." The E-Meter is described as a patented, high-precision, electronic device that is used to measure changes in resistance in the human body. The E-Meter measures these changes by use of a small current (75 micro amps @ 5 volts), which is amplified and converted to a needle display within a specially calibrated window"

BTW, they were bawwwing with their lawyers about paying the 1.7% duty! Also, since these meters are made in Tawian, should there be a logo saying "Made in Tawian". Wonder what the commerce dept has to say about that?

AnonOrange

27th June 2009, 02:00 AM

AnonOrange

27th June 2009, 02:10 AM

Well yeah, but not all skin is the same. Fingertip skin works great and thigh skin doesn't. Do you know the parameters Ted? It might be density of nerve endings, but maybe not. It's not density of sweat glands (see linked thread for research data).

Paul

The anus has the most nerve endings. Foreskin (if you still have it) has a lot too.

You know what to do.

Dulloldfart

27th June 2009, 02:17 AM

The anus has the most nerve endings. Foreskin (if you still have it) has a lot too.

You know what to do.

:)

paul

Ted

27th June 2009, 06:00 AM

Jesus H. Christ, I know that. What I keep on telling you guys is that the e-meter supposedly measures the conduction INSIDE the body. My test will disprove that.

Then, scientology can close down and we'll all be happy.

When and where do the scios say the meter measures conduction inside the body?

You keep on keeping on about sweat and finger motion being the source of meter reactions. Get someone to duct tape your hands to the cans. That will eliminate most of the motion you might be able to generate by twitching your fingers. Dunk each hand in a separate bucket of water. That should eliminate the sweat factor.

Are you really an engineer or are you just pretending?

programmer_guy

27th June 2009, 06:12 AM

What I keep on telling you guys is that the e-meter supposedly measures the conduction INSIDE the body.

Please produce/quote the SCN literature (i.e. in HCOBs) that claims that.

Also, where have you read this? Or who told you this?

(BTW, I am not defending Scientology on this particular subject... I just think that you are a little mistaken about this.)

AnonOrange

27th June 2009, 06:35 AM

Please produce/quote the SCN literature (i.e. in HCOBs) that claims that.

Also, where have you read this? Or who told you this?

(BTW, I am not defending Scientology on this particular subject... I just think that you are a little mistaken about this.)

Is this sufficient from the US Customs discussion? Frankly, I really don't want to go through 40 million words of nonsense from Hubbard.

"The E-Meter is described as a patented, high-precision, electronic device that is used to measure changes in resistance in the human body. The E-Meter measures these changes by use of a small current (75 micro amps @ 5 volts), which is amplified and converted to a needle display within a specially calibrated window"

programmer_guy

27th June 2009, 07:38 AM

Frankly, I really don't want to go through 40 million words of nonsense from Hubbard.

Then how could you possibly know what Scientology literature teaches on this subject?

If you want to prove this to be wrong then I would think that you would need to at least read the relevant SCN subject matter to KNOW what you are trying to debunk.

Maybe (no promises) I can try to help over the next couple of days. I'll see what I can dig up for you. Okay?

Zinjifar

27th June 2009, 03:18 PM

Hey Zinj, I found an old post of your's saying this:

"What's needed is a test using a one-hand can and an insulated nail pounded into the brain (with only its tip conductive) "

It's funny, but you do admit that what's needed is to make the measurement INSIDE the body.

Thanks!

This is about debunking the 'theory' common to *some* Scientologists that the current path of the e-meter is over the nerves and through the brain. This is not a *Scientology* theory; it's a theory popular with *some* Scientologists.

The fact remains that under ideal circumstances needle reaction with the e-meter is galvanic skin response, which is *not* a phenomenon of sweat or squeeze or body motion, but may be affected by those.

There are many ways to minimize such 'noise' when you're looking for pure GSR that Scn does not take advantage of.

My objections to the e-meter are not objections to GSR but objections to the *interpretation* of GSR reactions made by Hubbard, who infused various bounces, ticks and patterns of movement with 'meanings' that are beyond any actual evidence. It's these interpretations that make up much of the e-meter Tech and which are *divinatory* in nature, like pendelum swinging or entrail 'reading'.

*addendum* In fact, what I probably should have said above is that the e-meter Tech is a 'reading' of both the 'noise' due to flawed GSR response and the actual GSR *and* the purely random and mechanically generated needle movements due to the use of the *undamped* needle movement which results in many of the observed 'bounces' etc.

When you get right down to it though, much of e-meter Tech isn't in the needle motion at all, but the use of the e-meter as a stage prop like a hypnotist's swinging watch to grant 'authority' and distract from the actual hypnotic elements.

Zinj

Nomad

27th June 2009, 03:18 PM

"The E-Meter is described as a patented, high-precision, electronic device that is used to measure changes in resistance in the human body.

AO, I will point out that the skin IS part of the body, and this description could be used to describe GSR.

From my experience with the device, it is clear to me that it is responding to something, and sure seems to be more than finger movements. It moves too fast in both directions to be just responding to sweat. If you want to try to eliminate finger movement, it could be interesting to use stick on pads instead of cans.

I am not totally sure how an e-meter works to detect thoughts (I do understand it as a device to measure small changes in resistance), but it is clear to me that it does respond in some what to things about what one is thinking about.

Dulloldfart

27th June 2009, 03:21 PM

Zinjifar

27th June 2009, 03:31 PM

My emphasis. What counts as evidence in your book, Zinji?

Paul

Something more than 'Ron Said So' in any case. Whether it's the 'divisions of tone arm' over a session or the 'floating needle' or the more blatant 'Rock Slam' as an indicator of 'evil purposes', the interpretation is pure Ron.

'Dirty needle'? You tell me. What do these things 'mean' and who said so based on *what*?

Zinj

Dulloldfart

27th June 2009, 03:44 PM

'Dirty needle'? You tell me. What do these things 'mean' and who said so based on *what*?

There's a meter drill based on dirtying and cleaning the needle. All student auditors do this one. The student "dirties the student's needle" in maybe a dozen ways, one by one, then cleans it. For example, the student will ask the coach a series of bland listed questions, like "What is your name?", "What is your height?", and cut the coach's answer before the coach has had a chance to answer the question properly. After a while, short or long, the needle will get dirty.

The student will then ask the coach if he/she has any considerations about the drill, listen to the answer, and acknowledge it properly. And continue doing this until the needle is clean.

What is fascinating about this drill is that even though the coach knows exactly what is going on, the needle will get dirty and clean up exactly as the drill predicts, providing it is done per the instructions. As a sup I've seen dozens of people do this drill.

That counts as evidence in my book.

Aha, you might say. The needle only does that because the guy holding the cans KNOWS the needle is supposed to do that, so that is what the needle does. I would love to see someone genuinely produce a dirty and clean needle on command, without can fiddle, say by going through the drill and producing the opposite reactions to those expected.

Paul

Alanzo

27th June 2009, 04:08 PM

There's a meter drill based on dirtying and cleaning the needle. All student auditors do this one. The student "dirties the student's needle" in maybe a dozen ways, one by one, then cleans it. For example, the student will ask the coach a series of bland listed questions, like "What is your name?", "What is your height?", and cut the coach's answer before the coach has had a chance to answer the question properly. After a while, short or long, the needle will get dirty.

The student will then ask the coach if he/she has any considerations about the drill, listen to the answer, and acknowledge it properly. And continue doing this until the needle is clean.

What is fascinating about this drill is that even though the coach knows exactly what is going on, the needle will get dirty and clean up exactly as the drill predicts, providing it is done per the instructions. As a sup I've seen dozens of people do this drill.

That counts as evidence in my book.

Aha, you might say. The needle only does that because the guy holding the cans KNOWS the needle is supposed to do that, so that is what the needle does. I would love to see someone genuinely produce a dirty and clean needle on command, without can fiddle, say by going through the drill and producing the opposite reactions to those expected.

Paul

This counts as evidence to me as well.

I've also seen dozens, if not hundreds, of successful emeter drills done where the coach holds the cans silently and thinks of the events of his day. When a distinct needle movement occurs, the student auditor says "What was that thought?"

The coach does not answer, but instead notes which thought got that response from the student and goes off thinking of other things.

Time and time again - maybe even hundreds of times - I have seen the needle react again in that same distinct way when the coach returns to that thought, and seen the student say "That was the same thought" and have the coach acknowledge that it was correct.

I have been the coach on this drill dozens of time myself, and had the read occur on the same thought of my own, as well.

These two drills that Paul and I mention here are done every day in Scientology course rooms around the world. And they are actually some of the easiest drills to pass.

If you had not seen it with your own eyes, then I would not expect you to believe it.

Now, AO, you may not like this "detail" in your "scientific investigation", but you can't just discount it and look the other way.

You can easily reproduce these phenomena on the Emeter.

And when you do, you are going to have to come up with some legitimate explanation for it. And your explanation is going to have to be consistent and reproducible for ALL Emeter phenomena.

I'd like to see what you come up with.

But it better not be some cheesy skeptic bullshit like "It was a Weather Balloon!".

Zinjifar

27th June 2009, 04:08 PM

Ted

27th June 2009, 04:18 PM

These two drills that Paul and I mention here are done every day in Scientology course rooms around the world. And they are actually some of the easiest drills to pass.

Good points, Alanzo.

As to those drills done around the world in Scientology course rooms, every day, probably not any more. The image of purposeful students enjoying their courses and auditing is long gone.

Alanzo

27th June 2009, 04:28 PM

What I think is well established is that GSR correlates to stress reactions and that, yes, it's possible to *increase* stress reactions as well as abreact them. And also possible for a target to himself manipulate his purely physical stress reactions with training.

What also seems obvious to me is that Ron infused 'meaning' into e-meter reactions that goes far beyond anything demonstrated, but is intended to 'demonstrate' the 'reality' of the Scientology cosmology.

It should be possible to actually do testing on specific 'reads', but that's an issue for a real examination. Whenever somebody actually wants to set one up :)

Zinj

Then, what you are saying Zinj, is that used ethically, you believe that the Emeter is a device that can be legitimately used to locate times of spiritual travail in therapy.

Can I put you down on the side of the E-Meterists??

Ted

27th June 2009, 04:36 PM

It should be possible to actually do testing on specific 'reads', but that's an issue for a real examination. Whenever somebody actually wants to set one up :)

Zinj

Already been done.

Verified by thousands of observant auditors.

If the meter "reads" on mention of some person, place, thing, action, or time, it shows less resistance = good possibility there is something there to talk about.

If the meter needle "rises," it shows greater resistance = skip it. Talk about something else.

The e-meter is far simpler than rocket science. The number of "technical" comments as to what the TA and needle motions mean are very limited yet useful.

Testing can be accomplished on complete strangers. They don't have to suffer the scio indoctrination to have responses show on the e-meter.

Oh, heck. Give the meter to a bunch of teenagers to play with. To the one holding the cans, ask, "Who do you like?" or some such question. Watch that needle fall all over the place. Ask about "jerking off." Needle will likely fall. Keep asking and insist the person is hiding something, needle will probably get dirty. Careful though. You won't likely be able to clean the needle in such a setting.

Later, you can check to see if the LRH comments on missed withholds have any bearing on reality.

Good luck. :dieslaughing:

alex

27th June 2009, 04:42 PM

Good points, Alanzo.

As to those drills done around the world in Scientology course rooms, every day, probably not any more. The image of purposeful students enjoying their courses and auditing is long gone.

Yes the use of a "live" mind in drilling seems to be on the road to being superceded by the use of a machine that can reproduce "any" read with unhuman precision.

Pity auditor trainee's are not to be tasked with auditing machines, but live humans.

Dulloldfart

27th June 2009, 04:48 PM

Pity auditor trainee's are not to be tasked with auditing machines, but live humans.

Fortunately, there's always PaulsRobot (http://www.paulsrobot.com) to audit people, although I've never tried programming it to audit machines. :)

Paul

Zinjifar

27th June 2009, 04:52 PM

Then, what you are saying Zinj, is that used ethically, you believe that the Emeter is a device that can be legitimately used to locate times of spiritual travail in therapy.

Can I put you down on the side of the E-Meterists??

I don't dispute the use of GSR; potentially even in 'therapy'. I do have problems with overreliance on it, overinterpretation of it and some very basic objections to its use within Scientology 'therapy', that fit well into my objections to Scientology 'therapy' itself :)

But, I'd have the same objections to the use of a Magic 8 Ball within Scientology.

Now, coming back to your example, which I'd say is one deliberately 'misinterpreted' to grant exaggerated 'authority' to the e-meter, If I ran down a list of words until I saw a reaction and then rang a bell, I wouldn't be surprised if rereading that word later might cause a similar reaction. Why, the target might even salivate :)

Zinj

Dulloldfart

27th June 2009, 04:55 PM

Can someone video a meter drill or two and stick it on YouTube?

Paul

Alanzo

27th June 2009, 05:01 PM

I don't dispute the use of GSR; potentially even in 'therapy'. I do have problems with overreliance on it, overinterpretation of it and some very basic objections to its use within Scientology 'therapy', that fit well into my objections to Scientology 'therapy' itself :)

But, I'd have the same objections to the use of a Magic 8 Ball within Scientology.

Now, coming back to your example, which I'd say is one deliberately 'misinterpreted' to grant exaggerated 'authority' to the e-meter, If I ran down a list of words until I saw a reaction and then rang a bell, I wouldn't be surprised if rereading that word later might cause a similar reaction. Why, the target might even salivate :)

Zinj

I understand what you are saying but you have to take into account the exact phenomenon:

1. The distinct emeter read occurs AFTER the coach thinks it and before the student identifies it.

2. That exact distinct read occurs again BEFORE the student calls it.

So the Pavlovic stimulus of the bell in your explanation does not, in fact, explain the phenom as observed.

Keep going, though. It's fun to watch.

AnonOrange

27th June 2009, 05:04 PM

My objections to the e-meter are not objections to GSR but objections to the *interpretation* of GSR reactions made by Hubbard, who infused various bounces, ticks and patterns of movement with 'meanings' that are beyond any actual evidence. It's these interpretations that make up much of the e-meter Tech and which are *divinatory* in nature, like pendelum swinging or entrail 'reading'.

*addendum* In fact, what I probably should have said above is that the e-meter Tech is a 'reading' of both the 'noise' due to flawed GSR response and the actual GSR *and* the purely random and mechanically generated needle movements due to the use of the *undamped* needle movement which results in many of the observed 'bounces' etc.

You're doing great here. Keep on going in that direction, that's where the answer is.

Shermer said: "Humans are pattern seeking animals".

That's useful in nature, because most (but not all) patterns that our ancestors observed were meaningful. Humans tend to overanalyze data that has very little statistical significance. That why Vegas, the stock market, Tarot card readers and alternative medicine thrives. Most of the observations from those fields are random but humans unfortunately get addicted to this stuff and deduce wrong conclusions.

Even I do it, but I'm aware of it. This moring I made a post regarding Ponzi schemes related to scientology with only TWO data points. I said, is this a pattern?

Read up about the ideomotor effect. Very small imperceptible muscle movements cause reactions with mechanical or electronic systems that are on the edge of instability. Dowsers (water diviners) are particularly suceptible to that. Ouij boards are another example.

The e-meter tuning is specifically underdamped (and the damping itself can be adjusted). It is this randomenss, when coupled with factors like slight muscle movements, sweat that throws the whole thing off. I believe Hubbard said that the Psychs were a good target because there science was random.

The best way we know to tell the truth about this is to do a PROPER experiments, that eliminate physical sources of error and human bias (and trickery). So far I thought of doing a double blind test, where the auditor would only see the meter's response and determine if a subject was an SP or an OT-8. The other test is the needle in the veins test, with some luck we'll do today. We could also test with electrode but I can't find any at drugstores.

You guys could surely invent other tests, but please realize that a standard auditing session is NOT a proper scientific test. I'll oblige to it, no problem, but understand that it is totally biased by the auditor, the tester and the equipment.

Alanzo

27th June 2009, 05:04 PM

Can someone video a meter drill or two and stick it on YouTube?

Paul

I need to drink some more Mickey's before I do another youtube vid, and it's early yet.

Zinj?

AnonOrange

27th June 2009, 05:13 PM

Can someone video a meter drill or two and stick it on YouTube?

Paul

What I'd like to see is what a "floating needle", "dirty needle", etc looks like. The test should be on a real person, not a simulation by making the needle move with a potentiometer attached to the clips.

BUT, ABOVE ALL, here's what I'd really like to see: Record 10 different such patterns on video and ask several auditors to tell you what they mean. Do a proper test, were each auditor is asked independently what the needle movement indicates.

Compile the results. I expect AT BEST 50 % correlation. In other words, FLUNK.

alex

27th June 2009, 05:14 PM

Ted

27th June 2009, 05:15 PM

I don't dispute the use of GSR; potentially even in 'therapy'. I do have problems with overreliance on it, overinterpretation of it and some very basic objections to its use within Scientology 'therapy', that fit well into my objections to Scientology 'therapy' itself :)

But, I'd have the same objections to the use of a Magic 8 Ball within Scientology.

Now, coming back to your example, which I'd say is one deliberately 'misinterpreted' to grant exaggerated 'authority' to the e-meter, If I ran down a list of words until I saw a reaction and then rang a bell, I wouldn't be surprised if rereading that word later might cause a similar reaction. Why, the target might even salivate :)

Zinj

Hey, I'm salivating already! All this e-meter talk has got me going!

Woof, woof!

Just say, "Pick up the cans, please," then watch me drool.

:dieslaughing:

Zinjifar

27th June 2009, 05:17 PM

Hey, I'm salivating already! All this e-meter talk has got me going!

Woof, woof!

Just say, "Pick up the cans, please," then watch me drool.

:dieslaughing:

I am not auditing you :)

Zinj

Dulloldfart

27th June 2009, 05:23 PM

What I'd like to see is what a "floating needle", "dirty needle", etc looks like. The test should be on a real person, not a simulation by making the needle move with a potentiometer attached to the clips.

Are there really no videos of these things online anywhere? It's 2009 and there isn't even one video of this online? There must be!

Paul

AnonOrange

27th June 2009, 05:28 PM

You are clueless!

But amusing!

Put some SCIENCE in scientology. Do the test and you'll see who ends up amused.

I'm off to BFG's party ! Woo hoo!

Ted

27th June 2009, 05:31 PM

I am not auditing you :)

Zinj

Oh, a security check, huh? :confused2:

:dieslaughing:

Alanzo

27th June 2009, 05:32 PM

What I'd like to see is what a "floating needle", "dirty needle", etc looks like. The test should be on a real person, not a simulation by making the needle move with a potentiometer attached to the clips.

BUT, ABOVE ALL, here's what I'd really like to see: Record 10 different such patterns on video and ask several auditors to tell you what they mean. Do a proper test, were each auditor is asked independently what the needle movement indicates.

Compile the results. I expect AT BEST 50 % correlation. In other words, FLUNK.
Do you realize that this is actually an emeter drill film in the church used to train auditors to spot the different emeter reads?

No you don't.

You have some study to do, AO, before you can even hope to do a good expose.

Hopefully you will learn something at BFG's party!

Have fun and report back!

CornPie

27th June 2009, 05:49 PM

Can someone video a meter drill or two and stick it on YouTube?
E-Meters on EBay: http://shop.ebay.com/?_from=R40&_trksid=p3907.m38.l1313&_nkw=e-meter+scientology&_sacat=See-All-Categories
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKqI7rvsPZM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWQldX9fsSc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YCoqYyQXqc

Dulloldfart

27th June 2009, 06:16 PM

Thank you for finding some videos of e-meters, but those show nothing sensible at all. It's like having a two-year old demonstrate how a Camaro handles.

Paul

alex

27th June 2009, 07:57 PM

Thank you for finding some videos of e-meters, but those show nothing sensible at all. It's like having a two-year old demonstrate how a Camaro handles.

Paul

A camaro understears badly, doesnt have the correct front/rear weight balance to handle the power of a V8 and has shitty seats. It is basicly a sedan without the bigger rear seats and a harder lower suspension.

But it is true that a 2 year old would not be capable of scrubbing the front tires on a turn taken to fast, or even reaching the gas pedal to loose traction on acceleration.

Mystic

28th June 2009, 01:56 AM

Bugger all this emeter spam. Is an immaterial device. We need a BFG Party Cam and we need it NAO!

Dulloldfart

28th June 2009, 06:38 PM

So what happened, AO? Did you get on the cans/needles?

Paul

AnonOrange

28th June 2009, 10:12 PM

So what happened, AO? Did you get on the cans/needles?

Paul

I was prepared with all my stuff, but nobody wanted to bring an e-meter to the beach ! That's understandable. I did meet someone (who blew yesterday) that has two Mark VII's. He was lukewarm about the test (being a waste of time, bla bla bla), but at least now I know someone that may be available.

Thanks Cornpie for the e-meter videos.

AnonOrange

28th June 2009, 10:18 PM

Do you realize that this is actually an emeter drill film in the church used to train auditors to spot the different emeter reads?

If the auditors watch a FILM of how such patterns are supposed to look and are expected to recognize them in practice, then that's a failure from the start.

They need to be tested to make sure that they can actually recognize (with sufficient statistical certainty on many subjects) the whole spectrum of such needle movements on various patients. I maintain that results of such tests will be much less successful than you think.

I know experimental testing and many of the caveats and pitfalls that can affect the results.

Nothing in Scientology is done scientifically. That's why I predict the test will fail.

Alanzo

28th June 2009, 10:24 PM

If the auditors watch a FILM of how such patterns are supposed to look and expected to recognize them in practive, then that's a failure from the start.

They need to be tested to make sure that they can actually recognize (with sufficient statistical certainty on many subjects) that they will recognize the whole spectrum of such needle movements on various patients. I maintain that results of such tests will be much less successful than you think.

I know experimental testing and many of the caveats and pitfalls that can affect the results.

Nothing in Scientology is done scientifically. That's why I predict the test will fail.

In order to be effectively skeptical, you need to know more about this than you do.

I would love an alternative explanation to Hubbard's for the things I saw in using the Emeter.

But you are throwing explanations out for phenomena that do not exist, nor are they claimed to exist.

Get one of those Emeters from that guy you met yesterday. Get familiar with emeter theory and the exact claims being made.

THEN do some experiments to try to explain what, exactly is happening with the emeter.

You should open your mouth once you have something intelligent to say. Not before.

AnonOrange

28th June 2009, 11:25 PM

I would love an alternative explanation to Hubbard's for the things I saw in using the Emeter.

You got duped, that's all. It's hard to admit, but try to be objective about it. More than likely, the needle moved because you moved, you were stressed and sweat more and you incorrectly interpreted the reading as something meaningful. Misinterpretation of irrelevant data is the number ONE problem humans have.

I just realized something else. Stress tests are rather short sessions. You show up with dry hands and after only a minute,your hands start to sweat. That ALONE makes the needle fall to the right.

The auditor constantly readjusts the tone arm lever to center the needle back to the zero on the scale.

Then the auditor asks you a question about your childhood, and sure enough, the needle falls further.

Just get on the meter, zero out the needle and wait. It will eventually peg completely to the right.

Again, it's mostly about sweat and grip.

clamicide

28th June 2009, 11:28 PM

In order to be effectively skeptical, you need to know more about this than you do.

I would love an alternative explanation to Hubbard's for the things I saw in using the Emeter.

But you are throwing explanations out for phenomena that do not exist, nor are they claimed to exist.

Get one of those Emeters from that guy you met yesterday. Get familiar with emeter theory and the exact claims being made.

THEN do some experiments to try to explain what, exactly is happening with the emeter.

You should open your mouth once you have something intelligent to say. Not before.

Thanks. I was starting to wonder if I'd hallucinated all those hours I had drilled in the Academy getting endless folks to hold the cans so I could spot and produce the various needle characteristics on them.... *sigh*.

Alanzo

28th June 2009, 11:30 PM

You got duped, that's all. It's hard to admit, but try to be objective about it. More than likely, the needle moved because you moved, you were stressed and sweat more and you incorrectly interpreted the reading as something meaningful. Misinterpretation of irrelevant data is the number ONE problem humans have.

I just realized something else. Stress tests are rather short sessions. You show up with dry hands and after only a minute,your hands start to sweat. That ALONE makes the needle fall to the right.

The auditor constantly readjusts the tone arm lever to center the needle back to the zero on the scale.

Then the auditor asks you a question about your childhood, and sure enough, the needle falls further.

Just get on the meter, zero out the needle and wait. It will eventually peg completely to the right.

Again, it's mostly about sweat and grip.

Wow that's some excellent observation there, buddy.

You don't even have to look at anything. You just think of shit and you've got it all figured out!

You're more certain than a Scientologist.

Zinjifar

28th June 2009, 11:39 PM

I'm not 'clear' about why AO would be trying to 'prove' that the e-meter isn't even a galvanic skin response device. I can think of any number of things to 'test', including the hyperbolic claims by Ron and His 'Church' or even some of the sillier claims by *some* Scientologists about 'why' or 'how' it works. But, if his point is to 'prove' that the e-meter isn't even a variation on GSR, then I suspect he'll be shit out of luck, unless he comes up with some test that proves it's a 'brick', which may prove something to him, but, would have to be pretty stupid.

So AO, is the GSR element in the polygraph *also* just sweat and wiggle? Maybe your discovery will be of interest far beyond the relatively limited 'scientology related' community.

Zinj

Dulloldfart

28th June 2009, 11:46 PM

So AO, is the GSR element in the polygraph *also* just sweat and wiggle? Maybe your discovery will be of interest far beyond the relatively limited 'scientology related' community.

Zinj

Remember that it works on plants too (Google Cleve Backster). Guess they sweat and giggle as well. Sorry, wiggle.

Paul

AnonOrange

29th June 2009, 12:25 AM

I'm not 'clear' about why AO would be trying to 'prove' that the e-meter isn't even a galvanic skin response device.

Why do you keep on saying that and you make me refute it over and over again? I say that the e-meter only measures skin contact, in other words it is a Galvanic Skin Response meter, which gets it's response mostly due to the quality of the contact. Grip and sweat.

It does not measure changes occurring IN your body, due to what your are thinking about.

(If you use your muscles to lift something heavy, while attached to the e-meter (through needles), it is likely you will see a conduction change). Thinking about space aliens won't make the needle move.

AnonOrange

29th June 2009, 12:29 AM

Google Cleve Backster

Thanks, I did !

Backster's "Primary Perception" theory was referenced in the Discovery Channel television show MythBusters. The team attempted to reproduce Backster's experiments using a polygraph and an EEG machine. It reproduced the plant experiment and initially got something peculiar as predicted by Backster's work. However, after more carefully controlling the conditions of the experiment to eliminate the possibility of external influence, the plant did not demonstrate any measurable reaction to external stimulus. The team was similarly unable to coax any measurable response out of yogurt cultures, white blood cells, or eggs. These experiments were then responded to by Backster on a 2008 radio broadcast of Coast to Coast AM, where he criticized the conditions of the Mythbusters experiment.

It's all about doing a PROPERLY controlled experiment, something scientologists refuse to do.

Zinjifar

29th June 2009, 12:33 AM

Why do you keep on saying that and you make me refute it over and over again? I say that the e-meter only measures skin contact, in other words it is a Galvanic Skin Response meter, which gets it's response mostly due to the quality of the contact. Grip and sweat.

It does not measure changes occurring IN your body.

Quite obviously you don't understand what GSR is in the first place. The *polygraph* uses multiple methods of detection, one of which is galvanic skin response. And, while the level of sweat or basic contact may help set the *baseline*, the 'response' portion has to do with changes in conductivity *in the skin itself* as a result of stress.

Zinj

AnonOrange

29th June 2009, 12:39 AM

duplicate

AnonOrange

29th June 2009, 12:43 AM

I'm reading about this Backster guy. He's totally making this up, much like Hubbard made up most of his stuff:

"Early one morning in October 1966, Mr Backster connected the polygraph’s GSR electrodes to the leaf of a Dragon plant and then watered the base of the plant. His intention was to measure the amount of time it would take for water to reach the leaf and change its electrical resistance.

While expecting a drop in resistance as the water entered the leaf, Mr Baxter was not prepared for what followed – the resistance instead increased, and according to the polygraph results, the plant generated a curve similar to that of a human being experiencing happiness.

Mr Backster then tried another experiment. “It was early in the morning and no other person was in the laboratory. My thought and intent was: ‘I’m going to burn that leaf!’” Backster recorded, “The very moment the imagery of burning that leaf entered my mind, the polygraph recording pen moved rapidly to the top of the chart.”

He went to get a box of matches and returned, but realised the polygraph was already so agitated that there would be no observable response. So he took the matches back to his secretary’s office. According to Mr Backster, when he returned to the polygraph “the thing just evened right out again, which really rounded it out and gave me a very, very high quality observation.”

Over the next 35 years Mr Backster performed repeated blind, controlled and automated experiments to examine this phenomenon, which he calls “Primary Perception Biocommunication”, and others know as “the Backster Effect”.

His research found, among other things, that plants can perceive and measurably respond to intentional human thought and actions. Allegedly, Mr Backster’s experiments have been duplicated by scientists thousands of times using many variations."

Backster's claims were refuted by Horowitz, Lewis, and Gasteiger (1975) and Kmetz (1977). Kmetz summarized the case against Backster in an article for the Skeptical Inquirer in 1978. Backster had not used proper controls in doing his study. When controls were used, no detection of plant reaction to thoughts or threats could be found. These researchers found that the cause of the polygraph contours could have been due to a number of factors, including static electricity, movement in the room, changes in humidity, etc.

programmer_guy

29th June 2009, 12:45 AM

If the auditors watch a FILM of how such patterns are supposed to look and are expected to recognize them in practice, then that's a failure from the start.

They need to be tested to make sure that they can actually recognize (with sufficient statistical certainty on many subjects) the whole spectrum of such needle movements on various patients. I maintain that results of such tests will be much less successful than you think.

I know experimental testing and many of the caveats and pitfalls that can affect the results.

Nothing in Scientology is done scientifically. That's why I predict the test will fail.

Okay, I'd like to see the precise steps, layed out in detail, on how you are going to do this investigation in a scientific manner.

Although I have disagreed with you on this, I would certainly be interested in any info/input you will have to offer.

Bottom line: go for it! But be open for scrutiny on this... that's also part of the way it is done.

Zinjifar

29th June 2009, 12:49 AM

programmer_guy

29th June 2009, 01:03 AM

I'm still trying to figure out what his hypothesis is. Is it that GSR itself is purely a result of changes in 'sweat' and 'wiggle'??? Or that the e-meter doesn't use GSR?

How can you *test* something without a hypothesis to test?

If AO wants to prove that the e-meter doesn't cause sterility in planaria, well, I'd still want to know what the hypothesis is and how his testing regimen is relevant.

Zinj

He hasn't denied GSR effects. And has said so. He seems to think that Scientology teaches that the e-meter is measuring deep "internal" body reactions. I don't remember reading this particular item in any SCN literature.

But I am open for correction if anyone has an HCOB quote that states this.

Dulloldfart

29th June 2009, 01:23 AM

<my snips of AO's quotes>
Over the next 35 years Mr Backster performed repeated blind, controlled and automated experiments to examine this phenomenon, which he calls “Primary Perception Biocommunication”, and others know as “the Backster Effect”.
-----
Backster's claims were refuted by Horowitz, Lewis, and Gasteiger (1975) and Kmetz (1977). Kmetz summarized the case against Backster in an article for the Skeptical Inquirer in 1978. Backster had not used proper controls in doing his study. When controls were used, no detection of plant reaction to thoughts or threats could be found. These researchers found that the cause of the polygraph contours could have been due to a number of factors, including static electricity, movement in the room, changes in humidity, etc.

I read Backster's Primary Perception book about five years ago. In it he states in great detail how very careful he was to perform controlled experiments. Part of it was removing the human factor, in that the thoughts of the experimenters affected the results with the plants or other living organisms. So the experiments had to be set up independent of human thought, i.e. significant actions (like killing the experimental subject bacteria) were done by machine at a random time so the experimenter couldn't "warn" the bacteria of their impending doom*. If I remember correctly, the "refuting" experiments were done without such strict controls, not surprising if the people concerned thought it was all bullshit and such factors didn't exist. In other words, they were sloppy and invalid as they were not conducted properly.

*How the bacteria reacted to life-threatening stimuli was that they would flinch, so to speak, as measured by the GSR, then densensitize — effectively go numb — for about fifteen minutes, where they would not react to anything, neither threat of death nor actual death. After the fifteen minutes they would be responsive again. In other words, if an experimenter thought "Now I'm going to toast these silly bacteria" while getting up from drinking a cup of coffee three rooms away, the instant reaction to the thought would be ignored (similar to a "prior read" in Scn) as they thought only a more direct threat would register. But the more overt threat took place a few minutes later while the subject was numb and unresponsive.

Oh, interesting correlation here. Hulda Clark said that syncrometer readings were not valid for about fifteen minutes after a positive "read." I don't know the connection, but I thought the similar time period and lack of response in a similar sensitive setting was interesting when I first read the Backster book.

Paul

Zinjifar

29th June 2009, 01:29 AM

He hasn't denied GSR effects. And has said so. He seems to think that Scientology teaches that the e-meter is measuring deep "internal" body reactions. I don't remember reading this particular item in any SCN literature.

But I am open for correction if anyone has an HCOB quote that states this.

No, actually that seems to be exactly what he's denying. Either the reality of GSR or that the e-meter is a GSR device. I've had any number of disagreements with Scientologists about *how* the e-meter works, or whether the interpretation of 'reads' on the meter is anything more than entrail reading, but, the most common disagreement has been with Scientologists seeming to think that the 'conductivity' is over the *nerves* (and through the brain) which, per GSR theory, it is *not*. Nor as far as I know is that the Scientology 'theory', since as far as I know there is no 'theory' given as to 'why' or 'how' the e-meter works or what path the current takes.

I typically have the same or similar disagreements with some 'critics', Arnie being the primary one, about the current of the e-meter travelling over the nerves, as if they were wires.

What AO hopes to 'prove' by pounding needles into his *veins* is beyond me.

Zinj

AnonOrange

29th June 2009, 01:50 AM

He hasn't denied GSR effects. And has said so. He seems to think that Scientology teaches that the e-meter is measuring deep "internal" body reactions.

Correct. The meter measures skin contact quality, which is influenced mostly by sweat (and salt content), grip, small involuntary muscle movements and I'll even add blood pulsing right under the skin.

It does NOT measure the body's resistance changes due to different thoughts you may be having.

The only way I can think of sorting that out is to remove the cans from the measurement and take the conductance reading inside the body. I believe the conductance result will be steady, regardless of what you think. (provided you are not lifting weights or anything like that).

programmer_guy

29th June 2009, 02:01 AM

Alanzo

29th June 2009, 02:06 AM

Correct. The meter measures skin contact quality, which is influenced mostly by sweat (and salt content), grip, small involuntary muscle movements and I'll even add blood pulsing right under the skin.

It does NOT measure the body's resistance changes due to different thoughts you may be having.

The only way I can think of sorting that out is to remove the cans from the measurement and take the conductance reading inside the body. I believe the conductance result will be steady, regardless of what you think. (provided you are not lifting weights or anything like that).

Here's a question for you:

Can sweat, grip, and small involuntary muscle movements be influenced by thoughts you are having?

And, if so, then are those the ONLY THINGS that could be influenced by thoughts you are having?

Take your time, and remember, the whole world is watching...

Ted

29th June 2009, 02:09 AM

Correct. The meter measures skin contact quality, which is influenced mostly by sweat (and salt content), grip, small involuntary muscle movements and I'll even add blood pulsing right under the skin.

It does NOT measure the body's resistance changes due to different thoughts you may be having.

The only way I can think of sorting that out is to remove the cans from the measurement and take the conductance reading inside the body. I believe the conductance result will be steady, regardless of what you think. (provided you are not lifting weights or anything like that).

Good grief! With needles in your veins to prove your point, you are a masochist! :hysterical:

I told you what to do. Duct tape your hands to the cans, tightly. That will eliminate most if not all body motion. Then, get two buckets of water. Make it salt water if you wish. Submerge each hand in a bucket. That will eliminate the sweat/unsweat factor. Now take your readings. But be quick at it because the meter doesn't read too well when circulation is cut off.

Metering is both science and art. You will need to have someone present to ask pertinent questions.

:yes:

nozeno

29th June 2009, 02:17 AM

Trying to untangle the scientology can of worms is like..........

http://www.infoaddict.com/wp-content/plugins/hot-linked-image-cacher/upload//1022/754356724_5397681c4d.jpg

If you do catch it, you'll just end up with a mouth full of fur and perhaps some puncture wounds on your tail.

Good luck anyway. I suppose it's better than stickin' up liquor stores.

GoButtonIsBlowButton

29th June 2009, 02:26 AM

Ever done the meter drills? Ever cut someone's comm and dirtied their needle? Ever then cleaned it up? Ever steered someone to a forgotten thought? Ever done it with total strangers? Whatever is going on, it happens. I'm not saying anything about the validity of the subject, just that it actually occurs, and is repeatable.

The subject isn't ALL invalid, because a fair part of it was plagiarized, and LRH had a lot of people working for him.

Every clock is right twice a day. Even a blind pig occasionally finds a truffle.

nozeno

29th June 2009, 02:34 AM

Even a blind pig occasionally finds a truffle.

Gee where have I heard that before?

Plagiarizer.

I apologize. I just searched my archive. You changed it just enough to not incur the wrath of nozeno

Even a pig with anosmia finds a truffle now and then....

ThisFenceHurts

29th June 2009, 02:40 AM

Correct. The meter measures skin contact quality, which is influenced mostly by sweat (and salt content), grip, small involuntary muscle movements and I'll even add blood pulsing right under the skin.

It does NOT measure the body's resistance changes due to different thoughts you may be having.

The only way I can think of sorting that out is to remove the cans from the measurement and take the conductance reading inside the body. I believe the conductance result will be steady, regardless of what you think. (provided you are not lifting weights or anything like that).

AO, who are you talking to? You are contending a point that no one has made - AGAIN.

Do a goddamn pinch test, the memories of the pinch correspond with a fall every time? It isn't random!!!!!!!! No matter what the mechanism, the pinch test works to demonstrate that what you are thinking will affect the behavior of the needle. Agreed with everyone else here who says that the significance of such movements are up for interpretation.

Seriously, AO, you are really making critics look bad (OMG - are you OSA trying to do just that????????)

AnonOrange

29th June 2009, 02:56 AM

Do a goddamn pinch test, the memories of the pinch correspond with a fall every time? It isn't random!!!!!!!! No matter what the mechanism, the pinch test works to demonstrate that what you are thinking will affect the behavior of the needle. Agreed with everyone else here who says that the significance of such movements are up for interpretation.

Seriously, AO, you are really making critics look bad (OMG - are you OSA trying to do just that????????)

If you read the title of the thread: I'm just asking for a meter to do the damn test. I don't mind being proven wrong, but I assure you I have an excellent BS detector and I know experimental science.

Do you think the pinch test will work with a needle in the veins? I think it won't, that will prove my point.

Zinjifar

29th June 2009, 03:03 AM

If you read the title of the thread: I'm just asking for a meter to do the damn test. I don't mind being proven wrong, but I assure you I have an excellent BS detector and I know experimental science.

Do you think the pinch test will work with a needle in the veins? I think it won't, that will prove my point.

And, that's the point. *What* is your point? What is your hypothesis? What is it you hope to 'test'? If you can't narrow your hypothesis down to something falsifiable, no amount of needle/nail or even spike pounding will prove shit.

If your hypothesis is to prove that the moon is made of green cheese, why would you put needles in your veins? If your point is to 'prove' that the e-meter current does *not* involve current traveling over nerves or through the brain, well, that's probably fairly easy to test, but, that is *not* a theory in Scientology (which has none) and is practically irrelevant, except to those Scientologists who use their own squirreled rationalizations to attempt to fill in the black holes in theory left by Ron.

Zinj

AnonOrange

29th June 2009, 04:04 AM

And, that's the point. *What* is your point? What is your hypothesis? What is it you hope to 'test'? If you can't narrow your hypothesis down to something falsifiable, no amount of needle/nail or even spike pounding will prove shit.

If your hypothesis is to prove that the moon is made of green cheese, why would you put needles in your veins? If your point is to 'prove' that the e-meter current does *not* involve current traveling over nerves or through the brain, well, that's probably fairly easy to test, but, that is *not* a theory in Scientology (which has none) and is practically irrelevant, except to those Scientologists who use their own squirreled rationalizations to attempt to fill in the black holes in theory left by Ron.

Zinj

You're clearly still a clam!

My hypothesis has been clear from the start. I wish to show that thoughts don't affect the meter movement appreciably, provided the measurement is made inside the body.

The suggestion of using two buckets of water and immersing the cans along with the hands should work too. (that is, the needle won't move much). This test has the added advantage to make a further mockery of Alonzo and Zinj's GSR under the skin claims.

For something MUCH more interesting watch the CBS 60 Minutes show about mind reading with MRI machines I just posted.

Zinjifar

29th June 2009, 04:07 AM

Zinjifar

29th June 2009, 04:27 AM

I wish to show that thoughts don't affect the meter movement appreciably, provided the measurement is made inside the body.

I realize this may be becoming confusing to some watching this, but, that is exactly the point. Not even Scientology claims that a 'thought' can affect needle movement when the measurement is made inside the body. (not in the skin layer.) Yes; there are some Scientologists who are a bit confused about that, but, it is *not* a tenet of Scientology.

What *is scientific fact* is that a 'thought' (or, more correctly, a change in stress level) does change the electrical resistance in the skin. If you want to disprove that, feel free.

Zinj

(addendum: my apologies for using the term 'fact' here. There is no such thing as a 'scientific fact'. There is 'data' and theory and, so far, the data supports the theory that changes in stress level do affect the conductivity of skin)

programmer_guy

29th June 2009, 04:57 AM

What *is scientific fact* is that a 'thought' (or, more correctly, a change in stress level) does change the electrical resistance in the skin. If you want to disprove that, feel free.

Yep. That's the bottom line. It's just emotional reaction that causes the change in skin resistance.

What SCN teaches is that whatever thoughts that caused the meter to read consistently must be true (like I was Julius Caesar in a past life) which I contend is false memory syndrome... but that is a subject for another thread.

Alanzo

29th June 2009, 07:39 AM

Never made any "GSR under the skin" claims!

I only claimed what I observed repeatedly over the course of years with many different people in many different cities:

When someone thought about their day on the emeter, sometimes a distinct needle reaction would occur. And then when identified, it could be made to recur by thinking the same thought.

That is my claim.

I don't even say why. I'll leave that up to you.

Get it straight, dooderman!

Ted

29th June 2009, 08:05 AM

Do you think the pinch test will work with a needle in the veins? I think it won't, that will prove my point.

I already told you it won't work. Not enough surface area. :duh:

Ted

29th June 2009, 08:13 AM

ThisFenceHurts

29th June 2009, 08:18 AM

You're clearly still a clam!

My hypothesis has been clear from the start. I wish to show that thoughts don't affect the meter movement appreciably, provided the measurement is made inside the body.
The suggestion of using two buckets of water and immersing the cans along with the hands should work too. (that is, the needle won't move much). This test has the added advantage to make a further mockery of Alonzo and Zinj's GSR under the skin claims.

For something MUCH more interesting watch the CBS 60 Minutes show about mind reading with MRI machines I just posted.

Who do you wish to show this to? Clearly not anyone here. SINCE NO ONE HERE IS ARGUING AGAINST YOUR HYPOTHESIS! Yes, I was yelling there. Maybe there is a mirror condition to hearing loss in cyberspace...

CornPie

30th June 2009, 09:35 AM

...Thanks Cornpie for the e-meter videos [in post #162 of this thread]...
You're welcome. The last I searched for e-meter videos at YouTube I found none -- but today, just a few days later there are three. I hope to see many, many more e-meter videos -- serious, debunking, humorous, etc.

Dulloldfart

30th June 2009, 01:22 PM

AnonOrange

30th June 2009, 05:46 PM

You would think some FZer by now would have made an honest meter video of some kind. Guess not. Dex? Ted? Leon?

Paul

Actually I also think the FZ'ers would make an honest video.

Can someone make a video of the various e-meter needle movements such as "floating needle", "dirty needle", "rock slams", etc.

If you can't reproduce them naturally, hook up a 5K potentiometer on the alligator clips instead of the cans. Make the needle vary by turning the pot in order to make the needle as it's supposed to.

I just want to see how these responses look like.

Thanks

Dulloldfart

30th June 2009, 05:52 PM

Ted

30th June 2009, 06:08 PM

I just checked and I don't even see one halfway-sensible e-meter video on YouTube. There is an excruciating one from the CofS of a 30 minute TV program they put together that eventually shows a pinch test, but the way it is edited I can't see if it is a legitimate pinch test or if they faked the whole thing. People tell me the pinch test always works but the last few times I tried it it didn't work at all.

You would think some FZer by now would have made an honest meter video of some kind. Guess not. Dex? Ted? Leon?

Paul

I am not FZ, but I can speak as an experienced auditor who recognizes value in auditing.

The problem with the pinch test is that it is not 100% reproducible. If the subject is too dense due to case phenomena, drugs, tiredness, etc., the test will not work. The needle fails to respond. I have pinched a dense person or two, hard. :omg: The meter reads, but I believe it reads on the person's irritation or surprise, not on the pinch itself.

If the subject is clear, that is to say, perceptive, flowing, in good communication with own body, not dense, the pinch will scan off at first glance, typically right in the same instant the pinch is delivered. Then, telling the subject to recall the pinch just gives a clean needle.

I suspect that AO will not respond to a pinch test in the manner we are led to believe is "standard" in the sacred, Hubbardian scriptures. That's not to say I think he is clear. Oh, no. Quite the opposite. :yes:

Ted

30th June 2009, 06:21 PM

Actually I also think the FZ'ers would make an honest video.

Can someone make a video of the various e-meter needle movements such as "floating needle", "dirty needle", "rock slams", etc.

If you can't reproduce them naturally, hook up a 5K potentiometer on the alligator clips instead of the cans. Make the needle vary by turning the pot in order to make the needle as it's supposed to.

I just want to see how these responses look like.

Thanks

The meter by itself does not tell the full story of what is or might be going on with the client/pc.

For example, a severely ARC broken client/pc will show a needle phenomena that looks like a beautiful floating needle. So, if the client/pc was sitting behind a curtain, an auditor would not be able to discern if it is an actual floating needle or what is known as an ARC break needle.

AO doesn't know enough about auditing to ask an intelligent question or have an accurate observation that doesn't include his fixed ideas.

Good grief. The thread is making the meter so very important, and I have contributed to that.

The pc/client is important. The meter is there to assist the looking and communicating. The meter is not there to receive auditing. It is there to assist auditing when and where possible.

I am in Florida. AO, if you care to get together over here I'll give you all the testing you can stand. I'll even treat you like a human being in the process, at least for as long as you are cooperative. :yes:

AnonOrange

30th June 2009, 06:32 PM

If you stop injecting your own freak show into it, you should get a FZer in the LA area to cooperate eventually.

Paul

I just want to measure conduction inside the body. How can I do that without sharp objects stabbing the hand and letting a little blood squirt out?

AnonOrange

30th June 2009, 06:37 PM

The meter by itself does not tell the full story of what is or might be going on with the client/pc.

Good grief. The thread is making the meter so very important, and I have contributed to that.

I want to ISOLATE the e-meter's measurement ability. I'm not trying to make it important, I just want to show that when the meter measures body conduction and ONLY body conduction, it fails completely. Then I'll stop bothering you guys, maybe.

I actually think that Sci Auditing and any benefits it may have is strictly due to the ability of the auditor, most likely his persona, compassion and human communication skills.

Dulloldfart

30th June 2009, 06:40 PM

I actually think that Sci Auditing and any benefits it may have is strictly due to the ability of the auditor, most likely his persona, compassion and human communication skills.

So how come people also do well with my Robot Auditor or YouTube videos? I may be a perfect saint in real life but I ain't there in person when people have those automated sessions.

Paul

AnonOrange

30th June 2009, 06:57 PM

Needle reads made by hand mostly don't look right at all.
Paul

A Digital/Analog card output on a computer would allow you to precisely adjust the output you want to show.

Will anybody here have that kind of dedication!

GoButtonIsBlowButton

30th June 2009, 07:08 PM

... oh, wait. That's just what you want.

AnalOrange, please read this thread again. You don't have the answers you want, but there are answers to your questions nonetheless.

AnonOrange

30th June 2009, 07:50 PM

... oh, wait. That's just what you want.

AnalOrange, please read this thread again. You don't have the answers you want, but there are answers to your questions nonetheless.

I read every post. I just want an e-meter for 5 minutes. Nobody is offering.

Edit: AnalOrange :)

CornPie

30th June 2009, 08:52 PM

E-Meter Autopsy Part 1 of 2 (Mark 5 -- Early 1980's Model)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHDMEBoOYXo
E-Meter Autopsy Part 2 of 2 (Mark 5 -- Early 1980's Model)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkXlhSVc8Kw

Dulloldfart

30th June 2009, 09:10 PM

I watched the first of those two videos above. It's made by someone who doesn't know what a trim knob does. By that I mean he's not a Scio, although he says he's an electronics engineer and I have no reason to challenge that. I assume in the second video he finishes taking the meter apart and commenting on the insides.

In other words, it is completely irrelevant to the subject of what a meter shows, assuming you know it's a Wheatstone Bridge anyway.

Maybe I'll just dig up my own Clarity meter and see if I can put together a video of something vaguely sensible, if it still works well enough. I was hoping someone else would do this. Please?

Paul

GoButtonIsBlowButton

30th June 2009, 09:40 PM

The purpose of this thread is to "grab attention units", or in more modern parlance -- AnusOrange is an "attention whore".

Please, DullOld, don't fall for this. Let him go out and find any flavor of auditor from his area, and get a thorough demonstration of a meter.

Like a black hole in space, this is the Orange Hole, sucking into it anything that is nice or dumb enough to get close.

http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/GoButtonIsBlowButton/ABShole.jpg

Enough, I beg of you! (and me!)

CornPie

15th July 2009, 04:39 AM

Video of a scientology security check (sec-check) using an E-Meter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgEqHZUFoQM

clamicide

15th July 2009, 04:50 AM

Video of a scientology security check (sec-check) using an E-Meter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgEqHZUFoQM

Dear G_d...were you ever REALLY a Scio? This is just so............I mean Scientology is completely full of shit, but this is so far off the mark that anyone "in" would laugh their asses off. Totally a tool to discredit critics. Some days, I get a headache, but then I remember I'm actually allowed to take a Tylenol if I feel like it.

CornPie

15th July 2009, 05:06 AM

Dear G_d...were you ever REALLY a Scio? This is just so............I mean Scientology is completely full of shit, but this is so far off the mark that anyone "in" would laugh their asses off. Totally a tool to discredit critics...
To answer your question; I hung around scientology for about a year, on and off. During the latter part I allowed myself to get duped into joining staff for a couple of months. This was in the late 1970's, so my memory is dated about this. During the process of routing off of staff, they talked me into a small amount of what they referred to as 'auditing', at my expense, which I agreed to. I was gullible, and thought it was some sort of an auditing demonstration that was going to help me recognize the errs of my decision. I didn't realize until I arrived here at ESMB, all these later, that the so-called 'auditing' was most likely was a (security) sec-check. I don't remember any of the questions asked during the session(s), or even how many sessions there were.

I found the video on post #218 of this thread, on YouTube, so I don't know the origin of it. It looks like a section of a movie of some sort. Whether or not it resembles reality, that's for others with more scientology experience to say. I've added videos with E-Meter usage to this thread 3 or 4 times. Each time, somebody comments about them being simplistic or not realistic, while others see value in them. I suspect some people here think it's sacrilegious to show unsanctioned videos of an E-Meter. But there is nothing sacred about scientology to me. I want to be entertained by E-Meter videos; with accuracy, debunking, and humor. If that annoys some purists, tough luck.

MrNobody

15th July 2009, 08:10 AM

Dear G_d...were you ever REALLY a Scio? This is just so............I mean Scientology is completely full of shit, but this is so far off the mark that anyone "in" would laugh their asses off. Totally a tool to discredit critics. Some days, I get a headache, but then I remember I'm actually allowed to take a Tylenol if I feel like it.

If I remember correctly, this video is from the movie "TheBridge", which was made by a critic. You'll find more snippets of this movie on Youtube.

Nobody tries to help

Dulloldfart

15th July 2009, 08:38 AM

If I remember correctly, this video is from the movie "TheBridge", which was made by a critic. You'll find more snippets of this movie on Youtube.

The movie captures fairly well the atmosphere of org life. Any insider would note that the technical details are off, but many movies have the technical details (in whatever field) wrong "for dramatic purposes." For example, the movie "Twister" was pretty good, but I bet real tornado-chasers get into hysterics about the technical details in it.

Paul

Feral

15th July 2009, 11:39 AM

I've just looked at the last two pages of this thread for the first time tonight....my origional decision NOT to look at it is in fact proof that I achieved OT perception.

However, reversing my origional decision is conclusive proof that I have no OT powers...:)

clamicide

15th July 2009, 01:29 PM

The movie captures fairly well the atmosphere of org life. Any insider would note that the technical details are off, but many movies have the technical details (in whatever field) wrong "for dramatic purposes." For example, the movie "Twister" was pretty good, but I bet real tornado-chasers get into hysterics about the technical details in it.

Paul

Yeah, ignore me. I'm just bitchy today and shouldn't even be posting. :angry:
I'd just like to see a real sec check on tape. The reality of it is messed up enough without something like this. Actually, the real sec check can be much worse.

Dulloldfart

15th July 2009, 01:38 PM

I'd just like to see a real sec check on tape. The reality of it is messed up enough without something like this. Actually, the real sec check can be much worse.

There should be a few. One would be a real confessional, done for the pc and not some exec. This could include one being done properly by a good auditor, and one being done badly. People on this board seem to have experienced both kinds. I certainly have.

One could just be a flat-out wrong gang-bang sec check, with a note that these have happened but are not written in HCOBs anywhere.

Show the whole spectrum, as to just show one example that misses the others would give a false picture.

Paul

AnonOrange

15th July 2009, 04:43 PM

You guys still don't understand what I need and want to do.

I want to do a proper SCIENTIFIC test of the e-meter. I don't want auditing, sec checks or anything of the sort, because these methods are not scientific. They are totally subjective on the auditor's interpretation of the PC's reaction and the rather random needle movement.

I want to measure the BODY's conductance while under interrogation. One cannot simply hold the cans and expect to get proper results. Grip strength, micro muscle movements, blood pulsing, sweat will all negatively affect the reading. The measurement must be done through the veins or possibly as someone else suggested by taping the cans on open hands in two buckets of water. (plastic buckets to prevent ground conduction) It is my understanding that the needle will NOT move appreciably by this test.

To whoever has a meter, please try the water bucket test informally and tell me what you see. If that doesn't work, then I have needles, rubber gloves, etc ready for the test.

You guys have spent hours and hours debating me on this subject. Instead, why don't you spend 5 minutes to try it.

Thank you in advance, you god damn FreeZoners!

Dulloldfart

15th July 2009, 04:51 PM

It is my understanding that the needle will NOT move appreciably by this test.

Proving what? That auditing with needles inserted into the veins is useless? We know that already!

You can fill up a regular car's gas tank with water and note that the engine won't run, but it won't prove dick except that regular cars won't run on water.

Paul

AnonOrange

15th July 2009, 05:24 PM

Proving what? That auditing with needles inserted into the veins is useless? We know that already!

Sorry, but you still don't get it. Besides if you have not tested it, why do you say it's a useless test?

I want to prove that the e-meter does NOT measure the body's electricity conduction in response to questions.

Isn't that the ULTIMATE test you can do on the e-meter?

I don't have an e-meter. If you do, try the test and tell me what you see. Are you afraid to be proven wrong? I'm not.

BTW, why don't you try you telepathic test again? Announce it well ahead of time, get at least 12 people involved and we'll see. Again that test will fail, but you'll learn something.

Zinjifar

15th July 2009, 06:43 PM

I want to prove that the e-meter does NOT measure the body's electricity conduction in response to questions.

Isn't that the ULTIMATE test you can do on the e-meter?

No. For the hundredth time. No. That's not even a Scientological 'theory' (as opposed to a 'theory theory') in the first place. It *is* a 'pet theory' by some subset of e-meter practitioners, but, Scientology itself doesn't even advance a 'theory' as to *how* the e-meter works; just claims it does, with 'work' being a mishmash of tendentious and unsubstantiated divinatory entrail messages along with the fairly uncontroversial GSR reactions.

So, while you could very easily test and probably debunk a minority 'explanation' popular in some circles of e-meter users/critics (including Arnie Lerma's 'subliminal ect' fans) it would have *nothing* to do with Scientology.

And, why you think stabbing needles into your *veins* would be helpful is beyond me. Why not specify needles in the spleen and the far-flung isles of langerhorn?

Most of the sillified minority opinion regarding the e-meter current path specifies the *nerves* as a pathway, not the veins for christ sake.

But, again, that entire 'controversy' is irrelevant to *Scientology* theory, which doesn't specify any such mundane thing.

Worst of all, you seem to be confusing not only the above 'theory' or explanation, but the fairly well documented Galvanic Skin Response itself. Now, if your point is to 'disprove' *that*, and advance your own theory that *all* GSR is a direct result of sweat and squeeze, well then, feel free. But set up your experiment to do exactly *that*, not some bloody circus involving a pointless crucifixtion. (And, I've got $10 that says you're wrong)

Zinj

AnonOrange

15th July 2009, 08:49 PM

... the fairly well documented Galvanic Skin Response itself. Now, if your point is to 'disprove' *that*, and advance your own theory that *all* GSR is a direct result of sweat and squeeze, well then, feel free. But set up your experiment to do exactly *that*, not some bloody circus involving a pointless crucifixtion. (And, I've got $10 that says you're wrong)

Zinj

This will not end well! "Bloody circus", "Crucifixion" !

For the 100th and ONE time, I never denied GSR! I just want to eliminate it out of the equation and measure the body.

Please, someone, just give me the damn e-meter and I'll go away! (or badger you endlessly if I win!)

clamicide

15th July 2009, 08:52 PM

Seriously, WTF? I mean, I don't know any trained auditor that would just aimlessly argue against GSR. I mean, most of the folks I knew thought that "case stuff" influenced that, and so the meter read! (why the hell do I keep clicking on this thread...somebody please stop me; I think the tech sucks, but it drives me crazy because when I was "IN", somebody so misunderstanding the concepts we were operating off of would immediately make me class them as a clueless idiot).

Drugs?
Medicine?
Alcohol? LFBD.....yeah, I'm craving a nice bourbon right now. Guess I'll go suck down some hemp milk instead. *sheesh*

Zinjifar

15th July 2009, 08:57 PM

clamicide

15th July 2009, 09:04 PM

This reminds me of playing football with somebody who thinks the 'point' to the game is to put the football through the basketball hoop.

Who is it you're playing against? What's there to *win*?? Please specify *exactly* and concisely what it is you're testing, and, if it's a hypothesis advanced by someone else, who that person is and why it matters.

Zinj

Shite...I met those kids. Thought they grew out of it. I'm very, very stupid at times, but come ON!!!!!?????? Yikes. Thank G_d I have some pizza in the oven. Good food is good.:) Do I need a kitteh to go with that saying? I'm more of a reptile gal myself....

Ted

15th July 2009, 11:16 PM

This will not end well! "Bloody circus", "Crucifixion" !

For the 100th and ONE time, I never denied GSR! I just want to eliminate it out of the equation and measure the body.

Please, someone, just give me the damn e-meter and I'll go away! (or badger you endlessly if I win!)

Oh.

In that case, once you have e-meter in hand, your quest should begin at your local morgue. :coolwink:

Dulloldfart

16th July 2009, 12:11 AM

I don't have an e-meter.

There are several available on eBay right now, with some Mark Vs going for the buy-it-now price of $299 so you can probably get one cheaper. Item #170355800745 is a British Mark V, new battery and calibration, money-back guarantee, available in La Crescenta (LA). The British Mark Vs are better than the American Mark Vs, from what I read (I'm not being silly here. If it were the other way around I would say so).

You can then do as many silly tests as you want to, then sell it again on eBay for much the same price you paid for it. Search for "scientology e-meter".

Paul

ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn

16th July 2009, 12:19 AM

AnonOrange

16th July 2009, 01:17 AM

There are several available on eBay right now, with some Mark Vs going for the buy-it-now price of $299 so you can probably get one cheaper. Item #170355800745 is a British Mark V, new battery and calibration, money-back guarantee, available in La Crescenta (LA). The British Mark Vs are better than the American Mark Vs, from what I read (I'm not being silly here. If it were the other way around I would say so).

You can then do as many silly tests as you want to, then sell it again on eBay for much the same price you paid for it. Search for "scientology e-meter".

Paul

I don't want to buy it. I just need it for 5 minutes and I certainly don't want to be stuck with it, when 20,000 e-meters all go on sale in a couple of months!

AnonOrange

16th July 2009, 01:22 AM

Why not just pick one of these GSR meters up, at least you can play Pacman with it.

http://www.bruceeisner.com/mindware/2006/03/calmlink_biofee.html

Or the Wild Divine, it sure beats auditing Hubbard's cheesy science fiction

http://www.wilddivine.com/

That would be an interesting device for a blinded test. If the user can control the sound pitch by adjusting his/her relaxation, I wonder what would happen if the user would NOT have the feedback sound and would still try to control the device. In other words, a blinded test. Maybe the user would NOT be able to control the pitch level. I'd like to try it.

Jus' wondering.

BTW, that's been an awfully popular thread! I just want a damn e-meter!

Dulloldfart

18th July 2009, 02:42 PM

OK, finally, here's four minutes of a live meter dial. Sorry it's out of focus but it's the best my webcam will do. There is no auditing going on, just me holding the cans and thinking of various things and the needle F/Ning some. I haven't done much auditing in months (and I haven't self-audited with a meter for over three years). Must be all that Rub & Yawn — it's good stuff. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjdPuw_LJIo

Paul

Ted

18th July 2009, 02:59 PM

Geezus, Paul. That was a lot of sweating. I hope you got yourself hydrated after that. Guinness maybe?
:thumbsup:

AnonOrange

18th July 2009, 04:41 PM

Kudos to Paul!

Considering all the grief I give him, he's got the correct approach: Just try it!

Paul is the (second) best scientist on this board!

Dulloldfart

18th July 2009, 05:42 PM

I only did half the bucket experiment and I'll explain why. That's one bucket and not two; not half a bucket instead of one. :). You'll see from the video that at the outset and throughout the video the needle characteristic is different to the earlier video, in that the needle is a lot tighter, not as loose and floppy. It is 5pm here. I did the earlier video just two or three hours ago. I start off with the sensitivity lower, but after a bit it is exactly the same as I had it in the earlier video, but the needle is still tighter. Since the needle is not really reading with me holding the cans normally, it will show nothing to have it not reading even if I superglued the cans to my palms, so I am saving myself some hassle.

Similarly, when I plunge my hand and can underwater, the TA shoots down by about a division, but the needle characteristic doesn't change appreciably. I don't see that anything much will be shown by having both hands underwater, except it will be MUCH more difficult for me to adjust the meter and not get my computer wet and so forth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ite-YEFgTP8

Paul

AnonOrange

18th July 2009, 06:20 PM

Having BOTH hands underwater is crucial to this test. Right now, with just one hand you could affect the reading by squeezing the other hand, as little as you think you are.

I'm trying to show the meter's ability to measure current through the body, while not influenced by the quality of the grip.

I totally understand how difficult it is for you to do this alone. My I buy a round at your local pub so you can get a chap or to to help out?

Dulloldfart

18th July 2009, 06:23 PM

duplicate

Dulloldfart

18th July 2009, 06:26 PM

Having BOTH hands underwater is crucial to this test. Right now, with just one hand you could affect the reading by squeezing the other hand, as little as you think you are.

If you look at the video instead of your mind, you will see that it DIDN'T READ at sens "5" (actually about 7) with dry hands, and it DIDN'T READ at sens "5" with one wet hand. So what the hell is it going to prove by getting some guy from the pub or a hooker to help me get my other hand wet and discover it DIDN'T READ with sens "5" and two wet hands?

Now, in a real session one would jack the sensitivity up to the point where the needle could be read, but I left it at sens "5", the same sens as I used in the earlier video, for comparison.

Paul

AnonOrange

18th July 2009, 06:53 PM

The problem is the drastic change is TA when your hand is in the water.

Just record the TA when dry and when your hands are in the water. Do the test with dry hands and before taking a dip, adjust the TA to the expected value when wet and do the test underwater. I realize you may not exactly nail it with the TA, but all that matters is the needle is not pegged and free to move.

What I expect to see is that the needle will be "tighter" when your hands are underwater. We are largely removing the effects of grip.

It would be interesting to see if grip effects are all gone, when underwater. Without squeezing the dry had, could you try to squeeze the underwater hand to see if it affects the meter. I would expect much less effect with the wet hand.

This is a ground-breaking, earth shattering, volcano erupting, important test!

Thanks

Dulloldfart

18th July 2009, 06:59 PM

Maybe I'll try again in the morning, AO. I just checked again, with dry hands, and my needle is still tight. It's 7pm now, and I used to be less meterable as the day wore on, so I don't expect it to get better this evening.

Paul

Ted

18th July 2009, 07:07 PM

AnonOrange

18th July 2009, 07:17 PM

Good grief, AO!

I suggested hands in buckets of water to eliminate the idiotic sweat/unsweat factor. And, hands duct taped to the cans to eliminate most if not all of the potential finger movement. It is an exercise that would require a helper.

Thanks for reminding me who suggested the underwater test, Ted. I totally agree that the hands must be duct taped to eliminate the grip, sweat/unsweat. Also, of course both hands have to be underwater, in different insulated buckets. It's just that Paul didnt' want (or could not) do the duct tape even though I offered hookers and drunk chaps from his pub to help out. I also suggested rubber bands.

Paul is alone doing this, so we have to be patient, but he's still a good sport and he'll get it done, even if I end up being right!

clamicide

19th July 2009, 01:06 AM

I'm still trying to figure out how sweat creates an f/n....but maybe that's just me. And I'm one of those that thinks the tech is full of shit. Don't have a camera...don't have a meter, but I was always a good subject for drills, so if someone is local and wants to film my 'reads' on the meter, I'm game. I'm just still not getting ANY of this. It just seems like a bizarre off-shoot to go after in trying to discredit the cult. All the premises are just....ugh...I'm just going to go back to Evony right now. Oddly THAT seems to make more sense at the moment.