ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at

Bill Franks Interviews for UTR folks and new Exes

Discussion in 'Evaluating and Criticising Scientology' started by ILove2Lurk, Dec 22, 2018.

  1. TomKat

    TomKat Patron Meritorious

    Amazing how much you read into what I said. You tell me what I believe? All who question are evil SPs? Asking for objective evidence from subjective perception? You're so worked up you're revealing yourself. All of this falls way outside the category of intelligent, and so insults are completely appropriate. And it might be instructive for you to analyze your own statements and see how they measure up to your own criteria, eh?
  2. Bill

    Bill Gold Meritorious Patron

    YOU told me what YOU believed. I didn't claim anything, I said NOTHING about what you believe, you told me what you believe and I accepted it as what you believe. What's your problem?

    YOU said you would insult me if I asked for proof. I didn't claim that, YOU SAID IT. Why insult me? BECAUSE I WOULD ASK FOR PROOF. By Hubbard's definition, that is an SP. You would attack me because I was your enemy, whatever you want to call it.

    I agreed with you. You said you cannot tolerate criticism (request for proof) and you would ATTACK me for doing so.

    You said all that. So, what's your problem? I agreed with you.
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
  3. TomKat

    TomKat Patron Meritorious

    You seem incapable of differentiating between therapy and life. All your examples reflect that. Why is that? Did the Sea Org tell you slavery is a process to set you free? Well you were conned. Now get over it.
  4. TomKat

    TomKat Patron Meritorious

    I never said that you're an evil SP for disagreeing with me. That was just your belief, stated as a fact. And why shouldn't I insult you if you think subjective perception can be proven? That's beyond stupid, bordering on senility. Remember a time you felt really good and then prove it to me! You're either so emotional that you can't think clearly, or you're not intelligent enough to discuss this particular subject. Either way, the effect is that you're not acting in good faith. You high-jacked a conversation in order to convince everyone their perceptions are not valid, the same old materialist vs. spiritualist cliches that have been trotted out in science class from time immemorial. You bring nothing new to the table, so why are you still typing?
  5. Bill

    Bill Gold Meritorious Patron

    Why would you attack me for asking for proof? Huh? You make strange claims, I would like to have some verification. That's normal. Your response isn't normal.

    Now you may be different than normal people but one normally attacks those who are considered the enemy. Maybe you don't call your enemies "SP" but it's the same thing. You consider me an enemy just because I dared question your beliefs. That's straight Scientology.

    Why shouldn't you attack me? Because such an attack would be stupid, childish and useless. You are proving that, aren't you? It doesn't help your case and makes you look very silly and petty.

    I accept that you believe these things. Never had a problem with that. I don't accept that that means anything at all in the real world. WHICH MEANS if you try to push your beliefs here as true (rather than belief), I will challenge you. If you can't tolerate that and just have to attack me with your petty, childish tantrums, maybe you should not state your claims in that way.

    HINT: That means that if you preface your claims with "I have found" or "I believe that" or "I've experienced" it is clearly your belief and not something you claim is true in the real world.
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
    Type4_PTS likes this.
  6. I told you I was trouble

    I told you I was trouble Suspended animation

    If I discovered that I'd been conned by the guy that services my car, I would no longer give him my business (or my respect). If I then found out he was a well known, WW con artist deliberately going after (usually young) people and causing devastation to their families along the way I would add my voice to the inevitable outcry and would have no interest in hearing any 'success stories' reminding me of his wonderful oil changes, even if I agreed that they had been excellent.


    I suspect it really is that simple regarding all things hubbard related for those who are no longer going through life determined to be right or still living with a head full of scientology.

    I've never understood what ex-scientologists are trying to achieve or solve in your own lives that keeps them interested and defensive regarding the tech, is there any chance of you explaining that please?
    Type4_PTS and programmer_guy like this.
  7. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    I've never done black and white processing or creative processing.

    Why didn't you like creative processing?

    What about the rest of questions I asked of you, what are your thoughts?
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
  8. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    thanks, I have more things to say on what you post, but I'd like to hear TomKat reply.
  9. programmer_guy

    programmer_guy True Ex-Scientologist

    Part of this (auditing) is they don't seem to know about the topic of "false memory".

    IMO, the e-meter can "read" on things that are true AND things that are false.
    The e-meter is not a reliable indicator of truth (including "correction lists").

    But can a PC get feel-good feelings from auditing? Yes.
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
    Bill likes this.
  10. TomKat

    TomKat Patron Meritorious

    How's this: "I, Bill, do solemnly assert my right to be a run-of-the-mill Skeptic Society troll, but will howl in indignation if caught doing it."
  11. TomKat

    TomKat Patron Meritorious

    I agree with what Jung said about people being basically religious. It doesn't mean I have to like it. A religious person does not ask "what is true?" they ask "which side are you on?" The dominant religion here is the "Anti LRH" religion. Which means any discussion of anything positive about LRH ends up like this discussion did. If LRH gave great lube jobs, credit is due. His behavior in other areas is a separate discussion -- except for the religious, who paint with one broad brush and insist everyone respect their policy.
  12. TomKat

    TomKat Patron Meritorious

    As I recall, all your points are valid, I just wondered why there were directed at me.
  13. TomKat

    TomKat Patron Meritorious

    I agree. A reaction is just a reaction. And I was able to force reads for e-meter drills by going to a place in my mind that created them.

    But false memory system was a term created after the McMartin Preschool scandal to defend alleged child sexual abuse. But it is true that if people tell a lie long enough they start to believe it and conjure images to support it in their mind.
  14. TomKat

    TomKat Patron Meritorious

    I never liked making stuff up. That's how I felt about OT 3 also, even though the targeting of individual thoughtforms was effective. I think that after targeting a thoughtform, you could have it sing Yankee Doodle Dandy and it would be just as effective in getting rid of it. It's about intent.
  15. I told you I was trouble

    I told you I was trouble Suspended animation

    But why would anyone even want to credit someone with something if it was used to entrap, even if it did work?

    Also, are you willing to answer my original question (re-posted below). I have asked a few others this question over the years but none seemed able to articulate an answer or were perhaps unwilling to try?

    Type4_PTS, JustSheila and lotus like this.
  16. JustSheila

    JustSheila Crusader

    :roflmao: You nailed him, Bill.

    I often wonder if he keeps a running list of random insults that he cuts and pastes, or if it's just some sort of automatic reaction to anyone who disagrees with him. His last insult to me was completely random and had nothing at all to do with the post. Deflect, insult, deflect, insult. Anything to avoid actual rational thought. :laugh:
  17. Bill

    Bill Gold Meritorious Patron

  18. George Layton

    George Layton Silver Meritorious Patron

    He's too enamored with his intelligence to be wrong. In his mind someone as intelligent as himself could not have been duped and remained duped for decades so it has to be anyone that see things differently. Unfortunately what is true for him is true.
    JustSheila likes this.
  19. Enthetan

    Enthetan Master of Disaster

    She looks like she needs a good tickling. Or some such...
  20. Bill

    Bill Gold Meritorious Patron

    I love the logical, rational evolution of a discussion with TomKat:
    TomKat: These parts of Hubbard's tech are good and wonderful!​
    Bill: I don't think that's true.​
    TomKat: <insult><insult><insult><insult>​
    Bill: Yeah, that really isn't proving your point.​
    Some believers around here actually try to make a case for their beliefs but not TomKat. He knows Hubbard's insult tech is far more effective.

    ETA: Consider TomKat's logic: These things are true although they are unproven and unprovable. If you don't completely agree with my delusion, you are the stupid one.:faceslap::hysterical:
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
    Type4_PTS likes this.