You can either make a one-time donation to the site via Paypal...

...or you can subscribe and get billed monthly:

To join our e-mail list & get daily updates on new stories, e-mail us at
RSS Feed
Click here to add The Underground Bunker to your RSS Reader

Blogging Dianetics, Part 7: The Hard Cell

DianeticsStandardWelcome to our ongoing project, where we blog a 1950 first edition of Scientology’s bible, Dianetics, with the help of ex-Scientologist, Bay Area lawyer, blogger, and author Vance Woodward. Go here for the first post in the series.

In the last chapter, Hubbard made his big reveal, explaining that he had done what mankind had been unable to do for thousands of years — discover the nature of the reactive mind, which records our most awful moments during unconsciousness, and which plays back those moments at inopportune times. It’s the reactive mind that holds us back from being supermen.

As we pointed out, Hubbard had been setting readers up for this revelation for many pages, and then had announced his discovery with as much operatic force as he could muster.

That was all well and good, but he must have realized that he’s now made himself vulnerable. For any carnival barker, the build-up is 90 percent of the game, and once you reveal what it is you’ve been selling, you then have to worry about a backlash when your Feejee Mermaid, for example, turns out to be held together with papier-mâché.

Hubbard knows this, so in this next chapter, he does some fancy backpedaling.

He really has no choice. At this point, Hubbard has made quite a few claims which could be checked independently. And, in fact, more than 60 years later, there’s no independent corroboration of engrams being stored in cellular protoplasm, or a perfectly-recording analytical mind, or the presence of a reactive mind and its nefarious influence.

But Hubbard’s no dummy. Right here, in his first book on dianetics, he predicts that none of this malarkey will turn out to be true — which is, he says, all the reason more why his discovery is so monumental!

It’s a bold maneuver that should leave any reasonable reader shaking his head, but Hubbard knows that at least some in his audience will already be on the hook for the astounding claims he’s made for his “dianetic therapy.”

And that’s all that matters, he now says. Even though his theories may be completely wrong, all that matters is that dianetics works.

“Again, this is still theory and even if it was the track of reasoning which led toward dianetics, it can be completely wrong. It works. It can be pulled away from dianetics and dianetics will remain a science and go on working. The concept of the electronic brain was not vital but only useful to dianetics and it could be swept away as well — dianetics would still stand.”

It’s a stunning admission. Despite assuring us (usually in passive voice) that an (unquantified) body of research has taken years to build up this theory of the mind which evaded detection for thousands of years by the brightest human brains, Hubbard admits that he might, after all, be completely wrong. But it doesn’t matter, because his therapy (which he hasn’t described yet) works perfectly every time.

Well, if he says so. And even after essentially admitting that there is no science behind his discovery, he suddenly gets very liberal use out of the phrase “scientific fact,” which shows up numerous times in this chapter. When Hubbard uses it, however, it’s almost impossible to figure out what fact he’s talking about, let alone how it could be tested scientifically. Take this passage, for example…

“The scientific fact, observed and tested, is that the organism, in the presence of physical pain, lets the analyzer get knocked out of circuit so that there is a limited quantity or no quantity at all of personal awareness as a unit organism.”

That’s a pretty classic example of truth-by-assertion, Vance. Something is a scientific fact because Hubbard says so, not because there’s a fact in there that could actually be tested.

If we can make a brief aside, we’ll describe when we first really became aware of this maneuver — that the more strongly a tall-tale-teller insists that a fact is true, the more likely it is that it’s a complete fabrication.

It was 1998, and we were covering the Seventh Annual International UFO Congress in Laughlin, Nevada for a lengthy story we were doing on the “Phoenix Lights,” a famous pattern of lights in the sky that turned out to be two separate events: a formation of military planes, and a drop of military flares. One of the highlights of that UFO convention was a tribute to a recently deceased UFO researcher named Shari Adamiak. One of her friends gave a speech, relating a time when Adamiak and a colleague had been surrounded in a desolate part of Mexico by soldiers with AK-47s and no identifying insignia. Adamiak and her friend prayed to space aliens, and lo and behold, a flying saucer went whizzing by, which convinced the soldiers to drop their weapons and pick up guitars. While they played, the UFO couple made their escape.

We’ll never forget how the person giving this speech, perhaps realizing how nonsensical her story must be sounding, paused in the middle of it, looked at her audience with a hard stare, and said, “This is a true story.”

Truth by assertion. There was plenty of it at that UFO Congress, and there’s plenty of it here in Dianetics. As even Hubbard himself admits, there may be nothing at all to his theories about the mind. But he wants you to ignore that. He only wants you to believe that his therapy works.

VANCE: That’s a great observation: truth by assertion. I know we’re supposed to be sticking with “Book One” here, but you’ve hit on a core doctrine of Scientology: that the truth is whatever you say it is. So, yes, Hubbard is basically asserting things as true without any backup … but at least he gets sort of honest about it later on in life by telling his followers that they too can and should play PT Barnum, especially when proselytizing. In a later book, Hubbard actually defines Truth as that which raises your “tone level” (i.e. makes you feel good).

When I read this book for the first time, I already felt some disdain for academic learning. Before I even encountered Dianetics and Scientology, I remember frequently distinguishing between book smarts and street smarts. (I had neither, but admired one more than the other.) Hubbard’s emphasis on workability resonated with me. And, when you get right down to it, that little nugget — that workability trumps theory — is unassailable. That’s just a different way, I think, of articulating the scientific method: if your theory doesn’t match the evidence, throw out the theory, not the evidence.

So, here we have this guy saying something to the effect of, “I discovered a one-hundred-percent effective formula for curing all psychosis, neurosis, repressions and compulsions, for raising intelligence to high above the norm, and for restoring memories. I have ideas about why this formula works. But who cares about that? The fact is, it works one hundred percent of the time.”

Wow! If somebody really had made such a discovery, I’d expect them to present it in exactly that manner. It has a ring of truth (i.e. it makes me feel good!). Umm, yes, I am gullible in the extreme, which ties into your digression into UFO country. I couldn’t help trying to figure out how that story could be true. My guess is that the story teller and Adiamak went on a camping trip with a few friends. They dropped some psychedelics. They discussed their visions as they were tripping; so they basically incorporated each others’ trip into their own experience. Other friends, playing guitars, got incorporated into the story as soldiers. Eventually the two came down to realize that their hallucinatory soldiers with AK-47s were really just friends playing guitar around a camp fire, or something like that. Voila. The whole story makes sense. The audience got the truth, just not the whole truth. It was what teller subjectively experienced.

Golly, that’s a problem I have: this reflex to erect a story around what people say so that I can believe them. Hmm, I wonder if Dianetics auditing could cure me of that that compulsion. Uh, can I borrow a few hundred thousand dollars until payday to get some auditing? No? Why not?!! Come on man, it’s for the group. How much do you have in your 401Ks? Ahhhhhh! Oh, sorry about that. Scientology flashback; it’s like a drug flashback, but not fun.

THE BUNKER: While you’re having those flashbacks, we’ll proceed with the chapter.

Having admitted that his theories for how the mind works may turn out to be completely wrong, Hubbard nevertheless charges ahead with more theory as he now tries to convince us that his “research” has revealed numerous ways that the engram works, all of which, he assures us, have been verified as scientific fact.

As we pointed out earlier, however, Hubbard does a masterful job using that phrase to describe things that could in no way be tested scientifically.

We’ll give another example to show what we mean. Hubbard says that we all know the feeling when a certain person makes us feel stupid. Now, there might be any number of reasons for that, including the fact that the other person might be better educated and more well-spoken than we are and for some reason it makes us feel self-conscious. But no, Hubbard tells us engrams are at fault for that feeling, and if we can clear them away we will reach amazing heights of IQ:

“The recovery of intelligence by a clear and the rise of that intelligence to such fantastic heights results in part from the relief of word commands in engrams that he is stupid and in a larger part from the relief of this chronic shut-down condition. This is not theory. This is scientific fact. It is strictly test-tube.”

So we’re feeling stupid because our engrams tell us to. And if we could clear them, we’d actually be smarter than that other guy we felt inferior to. That’s a nice Charles Atlas scenario, but again, we wonder what it is we’re supposed to be able to check with test-tube science. If you can find something in that jumble that is scientifically testable, please let us know.

In the rest of the chapter, Hubbard assigns more and more complexity and power to his engrams, and has us imagine that we accumulate hundreds of them, making it difficult to know which one is actually playing out right now and holding us back. And these engrams have valence, which seems to mean that they have minds of their own, and we can’t help wondering if this line of thinking is what led Hubbard some 17 years later to body thetans — disembodied alien souls infesting us that must be removed by higher-level Scientology exorcism at $1,000 an hour.

With these engrams vying with each other for control of our minds, we turn out to be like Sally Fields in Sybil: “Multiple personality? Two persons? Make it fifty to a hundred,” Hubbard writes near the end of the chapter.

So to review: Hubbard has told us that we’re super beings with perfect minds who are being held back by “demons” in us called reactive minds, which produce engrams in large numbers, which compete to control us and can somewhat camouflage each other. All of which, Hubbard asserts, is cold scientific fact without once showing us anything that can be tested scientifically. And even if it were tested and was shown to be nonsense, it doesn’t matter because his therapy still works and will turn you into a high-IQ model of vigor.

Did we miss anything, Vance?

VANCE: As usual, Hubbard inserted face-saving language into his silver-tongued doublespeak. He wrote, “[T]he rise of that intelligence to such fantastic heights results in part from the relief of word commands in engrams.”

We can test that. Let’s say that we audit out the word commands in a sample of, say, a million people. We simply continue auditing them until they themselves experience relief … or quit. And let’s say that, afterwards, we find that even just one of them enjoyed an increase in IQ sufficiently large to warrant the adjective “fantastic.” Trust me, if you’ve ever had much Dianetics auditing, you probably consider even a single IQ point increase to be fantastic.

Not joking, I think that nobody could become smarter from extended amounts of Dianetics auditing. But let’s say it happened. Or, being more generous, we could suppose that one or two people might enjoy big increases in IQ while also claiming relief from word commands. Who knows? Maybe they’re going to school while getting auditing. Or maybe they wrote their pre-auditing IQ test while stoned. Either way, we could say their stellar IQ increases resulted in part from Dianetics auditing, kind of like how death results in part from birth. Just because A results from B doesn’t mean that B causes A. I hope you didn’t think that Hubbard was claiming that auditing out word commands causes anybody to become fantastically smart. I’m sure he never intended for you to interpret his words that way.

Oh, one last thing, a valence is a personality of one of the dramatic personnel in an engram. It’s more usual to refer to a valence as something that a person has or is in, rather than as something that an engram has.

“I want doe-eyed teenage hotties to dress me in the morning, and I want adoring cultaholics to give me all their money and time. Like my cravat?”
“No way! I’m also in L. Ron Hubbard’s valence. Wanna see my shoe box full of cash? Wait! You’re not with the IRS are you? Here, hold these cans.”

Anyhow, you have the idea. Xenu’s body thetans indeed sound like engrams revisited.

THE BUNKER: Well, we’ve no doubt left everyone confused today. But we soldier on.

Next week — Blogging Dianetics, Part 8: The Demon Seed


Posted by Tony Ortega on February 15, 2013 at 07:00


Share Button
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • VickiStubing

    Wait, I thought a valence was a window treatment. What? That’s a valance? Next you’re gonna confuse me by talking about meteor showers over Russia or some such thing. Is it too early for a stiff drink?

    • blissfulldreams

      t’s past 6pm somewhere so it’s never to early for a drink pass the bottle on you way past please

      • EnthralledObserver

        ’tis 12:09am here now on a Friday night/Saturday morning… prime drinkin’ time,,, so go for it!

    • Captain Howdy

      It’s never too early for a stiff one.

      • oh captain my captain

      • Chocolate Velvet

        Heyohh! I’ll second that! 🙂

    • Mighty Korgo of Teegeeack

      I sometimes get the same feeling from these columns. I am really happy, I’ll even go ecstatic, that Tony is doing this but I feel, sometimes, as though the dirt is rubbing off on me. Getting inside the mindset of L.Ron Hubbard, David Miscavige and some of the revolting former lieutenants is not always a pleasant experience. If I actually have an engram, it is my experience with Scientology. It is burned into me like a the brand on a cow. Reliving the sickness, though, does not clear it. It can sit there with me for a while. But fear not; when I get back to my work it goes away.

      • stillgrace

        Thanks for sharing the thought that the “dirt can rub off” on you. I agree. I have been a $cio-watcher for almost five years now, when I first became aware of the evil, after decades of benevolent and misguided acceptance of $cio. During intense periods of reading and investigations (especially about the origins of $cio), I can feel the dirt on me. It manifests as headaches, disturbed sleep, and this weird feeling of somnambulance. If I back off for awhile, it goes away.

      • sugarplumfairy

        And it should go away.. Because you ARE Mighty Korgo of Teegeeack!!!!!!!! Yay!!!!

        • Mighty Korgo of Teegeeack

          Thank you stillgrace and sugarplum for the words. The Mighty Korgo of Teegeeack is from the Marvel monster comics I read as a kid. They had Fin Fang Foom, Thoom, Gargantus, ZZutak, Monsteroso and a hundred others. Mighty Korgo would have fit right it. He would have also fit right in with L.Ron Hubbard’s cosmic history. There was a huge overlap. Marvel even had a character called Xemu, Master of the Fifth Dimension. He was the leader of armies that tried to conquer Earth. Makes you wonder how much of the Marvel comic book literature was actually based on engrams from past lives and the influence of Body Thetans. Makes you wonder how much of Scientology’s cosmology was actually based on junk literature aimed at little boys.

          • Ze Moo

            Captain Marvel was a comic strip and movie serial (like Flash Gordon) in the 1930’s. I have accused Lron of stealing from the 1930’s Flash Gordon previously. Wasn’t Korgo a really big gorilla?

  • John P.

    Thanks, guys, for wading through the muck of Dianutty so the rest of us don’t have to. Your expose is helping me understand more of the insanity of the core foundation of this cult.

    Again, this is still theory and even if it was the track of reasoning which led toward dianetics, it can be completely wrong. It works. It can be pulled away from dianetics and dianetics will remain a science and go on working. The concept of the electronic brain was not vital but only useful to dianetics and it could be swept away as well — dianetics would still stand.

    This quote encapsulates what makes me so crazy about Scientology in a nutshell. It continues to boggle my mind that Hubbard claims that his self-help is based on science when it is so obviously quackery (when it was invented, much less in the face of today’s understanding of physical brain science) and that this is the basis for it being effective in all cases.

    This pivotal quote really gives insight into the process of detaching his marks from reality: “Here are the premises. Here is my conclusion. Even if the premises are all false, the conclusion is still valid 100% of the time, because I say it is.” And, as I have said before on multiple occasions, this is an example of a medieval thought process in action: the appeal to authority as the source of truth, rather than the scientific method, which evaluates assertions by logic and evidence, processes that are independent of the speaker. The idea that a belief system (I don’t want to call it a “religion”) claimed to be based on science being based on classical medieval ontology continues to grate on me like a major case of sand in my bathing suit.

    Adamiak and her friend prayed to space aliens, and lo and behold, a flying saucer went whizzing by, which convinced the soldiers to drop their weapons and pick up guitars. While they played, the UFO couple made their escape.

    I loved the claim here. Too bad it’s not original in the slightest. It’s suspiciously like that scene from a couple millennia before in “Life of Brian:”

    And, when you get right down to it, that little nugget — that workability trumps theory — is unassailable. That’s just a different way, I think, of articulating the scientific method: if your theory doesn’t match the evidence, throw out the theory, not the evidence.

    Vance says this was part of the appeal of Dianetics. I would respectfully disagree — what Hubbard was saying sounds more to me like “If the theory doesn’t match the evidence, deny the relationship between theory and evidence. Then if neither the evidence nor the theory holds up, cling to the practices that were allegedly based on the theory and the evidence, regardless.” That doesn’t sound all that scientific to me.

    • Truthiwant

      Actually, John, discussing Dianetics is a bit like this video

    • Ziontologist

      You hit the nail right on the head.
      Imagine a real scientist telling the story of how he came up with a great discovery that so is great, he reserves the right to change the story of how he came up with it.
      Vance Woodward said he likes to make up stories to help explain something that otherwise don’t make any sense. If I were to do that I’d say Hubbard might have tried to sound scientific, but maybe in his mind he was thinking more in terms of magical ritual.

    • ” this is an example of a medieval thought process in action: the appeal to authority as the source of truth, rather than the scientific method,”

      Actually, medieval thinkers would have had difficulty with Hubbard as his argument defies logic. A naked appeal to authority like Hubbard’s was suspect with no evidence or reasoning to back it up was frowned upon even then..

  • BuryTheNuts2

    “The scientific fact, observed and tested, is that the organism, in the presence of physical pain, lets the analyzer get knocked out of circuit so that there is a limited quantity or no quantity at all of personal awareness as a unit organism.”

    ^^^I need to tune my six string AK-47 and play a little Neil Young and ponder this one for a while.

    • TheHoleDoesNotExist

      Also, that explosion over Russia was the traveling methane cloud from that Carnival cruise. The L.A. OT committee exloded it with their Dianetic Reactor minds. Or tractor beams. Much to ponder today.

    • Captain Howdy
      • dbloch7986

        Apparently it happened before Operation Give US Military Weapons to the Mexican Drug Cartels So They Can Kill Border Patrol Agents (aka Fast and Furious)

      • BuryTheNuts2

        Because the AK-47 is Russian of course!

      • BuryTheNuts2

        This book on Area 51 is a great read.
        The big reveal? No Aliens!

        • Captain Howdy

          I didn’t read it but I read the reviews and everyone said it was a good read until the end when she vomits up this batshit crazy theory that it was the Soviets causing the UFO sightings across the U.S.. The respected non-ufologists she interviewed for the book were pissed.

          • BuryTheNuts2

            I will agree with that assessment. The stuff focused on Area 51 was awesome. I learned a lot. I knew people who worked out there and not one of them ever discussed a single thing about the place.

  • Mighty Korgo of Teegeeack

    I also noticed the back-pedaling the times I have read the book. I interpreted those statements differently, though. I saw Hubbard as saying that Dianetics may change at some point, in the same way Newtonian physics evolved into Einsteinian physics. His science is deep, he is only one man, he has tested it for only 15 years, with only 270 people, and it is bound to change. Others will go forth, find that their are exceptions to his rules and build upon the exceptions to produce something even greater.

    When I have talked to Scientologists about the claims of Dianetics, they have noticed neither the claims nor the backpedaling. Many, had not read the book. Now, many of the Scientologists I have known have been searchers, people without much direction, who just needed someone to feed them an good line and give them some purpose. They would then put on the clean shirt and tie, go out and “do it for Ron”.

    But the far larger group have been the ones who have forgotten what is there. The contents of the book have been submerged under a flood of “org culture” and his other writings. Clear seems to have evolved into “simply the best person, that person can be”. Jason Beghe’s “show me a motherfucking clear” is meaningless to them. They are like the robot on Lost in Space waving its arms while shouting, “Does not compute, Does not compute”.

    Other outs for culties who can’t confront what they have read:

    Don’t ask them to demonstrate their special abilities. It is bad manners.
    I don’t know why Heber wears glasses, but whatever the reason doesn’t change what L.Ron has done for me.
    DIanetics doesn’t say that– I wish I had a copy here.
    Dianetics doesn’t say that– I wish I could find the part in this copy here.
    Dianetics doesn’t say that– the stenographer put it in and it was changed in a later edition.
    You misunderstand the word “optimum”.
    That is only while in an auditing session.
    He missed an engram. It keyed in.
    He was a suppressive all the while and made no case gain.

    L.Ron was postulating much of the time.

    • sugarplumfairy

      Lron should have postulated better teeth..

      • Mighty Korgo of Teegeeack

        That’s another one… “We don’t know the considerations of people who are so spiritually advanced”. You know it makes me mad just thinking about how I stood there and listened to that nonsense. If I learned something from Scientology it had nothing to do with Hubbard’s crazy writing. The lesson was, “Be polite, but state your opinion and don’t be scared to walk away”. The corollaries would be, “Though majority opinion is not always right, listen to it closely,” and “A person may be convincing because of the listener’s emotional needs or because he is actually making sense”.

        • sugarplumfairy

          I’d say that’s a pretty good lesson for all of us..

        • nessness

          The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time. The terror of their tyranny, however, is alleviated by their lack of consistency.
          –Albert Einstein My favourite quote of all time – was he referring to Hubbard? I love “Be polite, but state your opinion and don’t be scared to walk away” It is good to self reference for the truth.

  • 1subgenius

    “Just because A results from B doesn’t mean that B causes A”

    I think he meant to say “Just because A precedes B…..”

    • scnethics

      Does that necessarily follow? Kidding – yeah, that’s what he meant, but then he’d have to follow it with “doesn’t mean that A caused B”, and I think he really wanted B to not be the cause of A.

      • Sorry for the confusion. I prolly shoulda said, “Just because A results in part from B doesn’t mean that B causes A.” Either way, as a clearer example, death results from birth even though birth doesn’t cause death. I was using a less-intuitive definition of “result,” i.e. “to end in a particular way.”

        • 1subgenius

          Post hoc ergo propter hoc

          “precedes” eliminates any confusion.

          The examples you give do not show any IQ increase “resulting” in any meaning of the word from Dianetics.

          • dbloch7986

            Or for simplicity’s sake: don’t confuse causation with correlation.

            • An xcvd cartoon has a student telling his teacher, “I always used to confuse correlation with causation, but since I took your statistics class I’m clear about the distinction.” — “Glad I helped!” — “Maybe you did, maybe you didn’t.”

  • Truthiwant

    Oh my God! I just knew I should have taken a few days away from the bunker. I feel that I’m in the valence of a body thetan, sniffing cocaine and pointing an AK-47 at some teenage hotties while my IQ is soaring towards the galaxies.

    Now I know for scientific fact that the meteor over Russia was Xenu returning to Teegeeak.

  • TheHoleDoesNotExist

    I can just hear the True Believers jumping up and down with their tomes of Hubbard’s tests, like OCA, all scientific of course, that Proves their IQ went through the roof along with their baggage. Chasing any Hubbard claim is just like chasing Alice’s rabbit. I once did just that on the whole testing issue following other searchers work. I always find a) Hubbard ripped many people off on the way and b) it involved some twisted plot to get revenge on his enemies, real or imagined.

    One basic test was slated for mental patients, I think paranoid/schizo was mentioned. I just dug up a quote yesterday from Barefoot Messiah, Chap. 10 where Hubbard recalls speaking to a group of psychiatrists who told him they might have to lock him up if he claimed this Dianetcs stuff would cure people. He replied that he had been diagnosed as Paranoid. So it’s possible one of his tests originally was one used on Him. Also, since the same ones are used over and over, you get to know what to answer and voila! You’re a Genius thanks to ….
    And these tests could also be viewed as additional “evidence” that Hubbard wanted all of us to help him cure his paranoia.

    This was a very valuable and insightful lesson today. I never thought in my lifetime I would understand the guitarists that I have known. Now I do and realize how lucky I am that I married a pianist.

  • BosonStark

    Dianutty works because the placebo effect works.

    Some clams claim that they went into Scientology with a lot of skepticism but once they committed themselves to doing the drills and being audited, they all wanted it to work — they all wanted to believe. They were all aware that a vital component of the trap — I mean the tech — was that it wouldn’t work unless you did it, and believed in it, and believed that it had worked for others.

    It’s not just any “what” that is true for you. The “what” that is true for you has to be Hubbard’s what — the works 100% of the time, unless it’s your fault or a “technical” mistake that must be done over.

    Many people who go exterior (out of body) with Scientology could also go exterior by staring at the same spot on the wall for two hours. What you won’t get by doing that is a sense of belonging to a club — upping your status with the IAS — and salvaging the whole planet. You won’t get any reinforcement, encouragement or ego stroking that you’ve recovered yourself as an elite being far superior to the lowly wog, such that you want to sell everybody on it including your own mother.

    • yeah …Mosey has posted a video over at Marty’s site’s only about 2mins long but she rambles on about how much the auditing has helped her with baggage . Kind of hard to follow it …odd…since scientology is supposed to help you with some great communications skills. “Auditing is so great …it helps me not create baggage ” ….huh. Well gee …sign me up . That blog is getting weirder and weirder.

      • TheHoleDoesNotExist

        Wot? You didn’t follow? Simple. Airlines are charging unethical fees for extra baggage now, so get ethical and you won’t have extra baggage, thus you will be ecstatic. See?

        • i like my baggage …i have a lovely set of abandonment issues that match with my carry on cynical outlook on life 😉

          • BuryTheNuts2

            You freakin’ kill me!

            • Ziontologist

              I never smoked a joint with Cher, but if I did, I hope I would have the wisdom not to run out the next day and get a nose job.

            • BuryTheNuts2

              Ah, you remember that one! That was her all time greatest, ever.
              Kim has fans here.

            • you crack me up …

            • BuryTheNuts2

              Sometimes you feel like a nut….
              Sometimes you are just surrounded by them!


            • no …i did not get a nose job but i did by a wig …kinda spiced things up with the boyfriend who took me to the party in the first place 😉 Man …i loved my early 20’s. Now i am a boring 40 something woman and my 10 year old daughter thinks i am lame.

            • Ziontologist

              (I tried to edit on ma phone and I deleted and it went to “Guest.”)

              You are not boring. You speak from your heart, and sometimes you come out with statements that have a very charming and lyrical quality.
              I remember singing to myself, “I smoked a joint with Cher, but then I lost my hair …”

            • honey ~ that’s not why i got the wig 😉 LOL

            • OK…now i think i love you 😉 LOL

            • Missionary Kid

              Unsolicited opinion: All kids like to tell their parents they’re lame. The best thing you can do is tell her, “So what. I’m me.” It’s a lever kids use on their parents to try to control them.

              The kid may be embarrassed about stuff you do, but usually their friends, whose opinion your kid is worried about, don’t care. It’s all a part of the hyper-self centered world kids live in.

              Sometimes “lame” is a label that kids put on stuff they might not be interested in, and that can be because of their stage in life. Often, once they try it themselves, their opinion changes. If it doesn’t , it’s your thing, not theirs.

              Please celebrate your 40s and live your life, not theirs. Your example is a big part of their path into adulthood.

              Your kid has the advantage of not seeing her mom in a cult, being controlled by some leader or afraid of the cult’s evil ways. Enjoy your freedom.

            • That was awesome …thank you 😉

            • Missionary Kid

              You’re welcome. Showing that while you’re aware of their feelings, you don’t fear them is a strong message to a kid. It lets them know that they are not you, and vice versa; you’re separate people.

          • TheHoleDoesNotExist


          • Chocolate Velvet

            Dingdingding! That one wins the prize!

            Ironically, it’s a lovely new set of luggage, from samsonite… 🙂

      • BosonStark

        I didn’t think Mosey’s commercial/testimony was bad. And I can go along with the idea of auditing helping her to put her baggage down or that a combination of that and being with Marty has caused a nice shift in her life.

        It’s just the developing of assessment skills for making present or future judgements — so you won’t pick up new baggage — that leaves me skeptical. After all, just being a committed Scientologist, as Marty was for decades, seems to entail taking on a huge amount of new baggage, all in the name of Hubbard, and what he thought Scientology MUST accomplish, “before it is too late.”

        So, if a person can just feel good from the bait and not get involved in the imperative of the switch — KSW — the hard sell of it to others — I think it’s okay. It’s never going to spread that way though. You have to sell a piece of blue sky.

        • Bob

          Boson, I think you have hit on a very valid observation. The auditing in a controlled way allows you to look at baggage and diffuse it and have epiphanies regarding how to act in the future that gets a better result. And to that degree it is truth for you. But the new baggage you get is forced on you by channeling your thought process through the courses and direction of the case supervisor who oversees your auditing. It is another reason people get great relief when they first get in and then take a sharp turn for the worst as they proceed to the upper levels. And I have seen this time and time again with those who complete OT VIII. They still have some of the same baggage they were suppose to have vanquished but they also have the added warped viewpoint of the worst of Clamatology.

          • “The auditing in a controlled way allows you to look at baggage and diffuse it and have epiphanies regarding how to act in the future that gets a better result. And to that degree it is truth for you.”

            Yeah …that’s scientology alright…one big epiphany after another

        • Chocolate Velvet

          Yes. I was recently reviewing the video of Jesse Prince talking about Marty, at the Hamburg conference. He seemed to be saying that Marty has a hook deep in his belly BECAUSE of sci’s role in his life. Dealing with trauma through auditing bound him to the system.

          Because Marty was given auditing in order to deal with his trauma, scientology now functions as a kind of firewall between Marty’s identity and the memories of murder, a woman’s blood and brains splattered on his shirt, and his own brush with death. I see validity in this analysis.

          It makes the problem with scientology quite apparent. Instead of eliminating baggage, scientology seems to help you to just repack it all in a different suitcase, one you bought from L Ron. And that bag is chained to your leg, with titanium-encased links.

        • blissfulldreams

          you’d a thunk with her daddy the psychologist/psychotherapist or psycowhatever that she would of had enough therapy over her life without auditing

          don’t auditors ask questions in regards to your marrage and can you just see marty asking mosey just what her with holds were while he was auditing her

      • Captain Howdy

        Did you read the one were he says that Ray Lewis was an inspirational role model for him ? Lewis was involved in a double murder and got away scot-free and he’s a role model ? Oh I understand… nevermind.

      • What is missing from her strange 2 minute rambling video is the acknowledgment that she got a whole new set of luggage when she married Rathbun.

        It seems that Scientology teaches most adherents to explain Scientology only in vague and bumbling terms. It’s also weird that her husband is her auditor. Having your husband as your ‘therapist’ is just asking for marital problems (besides being entirely unethical on Marty’s part).

        • blissfulldreams

          she might wont to get one of these just for marty’s baggage alone

        • i thought the same thing ~ it is not acceptable for my uncle to hear my confession ….or my husband to be my surgeon …or my mother to be my oncologist. How is it ethical for him to be auditing his wife ? it just sounds creepy and controlling but hey whatever …scientology is creepy and controlling

          • Kevin Hogan

            No case on post, that is all…

        • BosonStark

          Remember in game shows, where the consolation prize was sometimes a set of luggage–so you could drag your misfortune around for years? It’s not everyone who can stuff their baggage with wads of cash like Dr. Hubtard, but did that really make him happy or peaceful in the end?

          • Missionary Kid

            First prize: a week with Xenu, Second prize: two weeks with Xenu.

        • 1subgenius

          “Having your husband as your ‘therapist'”

          “Religious counselor”…..right.
          Marty’s doing the same thing as lrh and Scientology…..pretending its religion to avoid being charged with practicing medicine without a license.
          The fact that Mosey, whose father is allegedly a psychologist, is basically seeing it as psychotherapy highlights this fraud.

        • It is incredibly unethical for her husband to be her pseudo-therapist. And he’s got the religious counselor angle as well. It’s like your husband being both your therapist and your priest. Not that my opinion of Marty Rathbun was exactly high, but it just plummeted even more. Putting himself in that position of power over his wife is despicable.

          • BuryTheNuts2

            It is psychic rape.

      • TheHoleDoesNotExist

        I hope Mosey has a couple undisclosed cell phones in her baggage. (like Katie’s) Oh wait, Marty is sec checking her.

        I hope Mosey’s father has a couple undisclosed cell phones in her baggage.

      • Sid Snakey

        I really like Mosey, she seems like a pretty cool person.

        I’m so disappointed to see Marty using her to share her wins to promote Scientology. It’s somehow sad to see her talking like that.

        • yeah …something about it made me really uncomfortable. She loves her husband loyal and supportive …watching that just made me feel like she was being used to help Marty repackage himself …kind of a grown up version of “Toddlers and tiaras ” when the fat moms dress up their cute kids and use phrases like ” We love to win …we love doing commercials ” or whatever.

      • EnthralledObserver

        She did ramble in my opinion too. In fact it sounded a bit frantic, like she was so excited and her mind was going too fast for her mouth to get what she wanted to say out. The clams claimed they saw calmness and focus… that’s not what I perceived at all. But we aren’t allowed to say so, else we (I) got accused of not even knowing what she was talking about. I think her ‘story’ was quite clear, and I thought it was run of the mill, everyday, nothing exceptional (I mean, intellectually we know carrying around burdens and picking up extra burdens is probably not a good thing and it might distract you – this is not a new or unique concept), but it was the delivery that was weird and worriesome. This woman, at this point in time, was not at all in a moment of calm clarity.

    • Kevin Hogan

      Oh WOW! I never thought of that one, that last sentence is absolute genius, except there are no absolutes. You could start a whole new religion just based on the single truth, well it’s true to me anyway LOL..Carry on…

  • “I want doe-eyed teenage hotties to dress me in the morning, and I want adoring cultaholics to give me all their money and time. Like my cravat?”

    The fact that he never hit on one of messengers (that we know of), makes me all-the-more suspicious of the man. Must have been the ED. Maybe COB has also discovered that power and abuse can be somewhat of a replacement for sex. Ol’ Ron was sure “rubbing them out” when he was younger.

  • scnethics

    “The scientific fact, observed and tested, is that the organism, in the
    presence of physical pain, lets the analyzer get knocked out of circuit
    so that there is a limited quantity or no quantity at all of personal
    awareness as a unit organism.”

    This is observable fact: If you
    hit someone hard enough (deliver enough physical pain), they’ll go
    unconscious (no quantity of personal awareness). There’s always some
    truth mixed with the lies. The unscientific parts are:
    1. When experiencing no pain, a person is at a height of personal awareness
    2. A small amount of pain lowers personal awareness
    3. The more pain they experience, the less conscious a person is.

    But Hubbard had already told me I was going to be free of pain, and I was just a sucker for that. 🙂

    • Perfect example of how I can just no read anything Hubbard wrote. I read the paragraph and read your interpretation and see how you got there, but there is no way I could (be bothered to?) understand the paragraph in the first place. Was the poor explanation an attempt at sounding mystical or just really bad prose?

  • bit disappointed to see the scientology rep scheduled for the Victoria Derbyshire radio show on BBCR5live didn’t seem to make it…. there was no mention at all so I tweeted and asked what happened and if he/she rescheduled.

    This Tommy Girl vs Bauer Media story is getting legs and appearing on Radar and DalyMail today … best write up and comments so far on HollyWood reporter

    • VickiStubing

      I am also disappointed but not at all surprised that the rep was a no-show. I figured it would be Mark Pinchin, but is it possible that he is still getting sec-checked for any possible missteps on the Titchmarch show?

      • got this reply from her directly:

        • VickiStubing

          Must be he doesn’t have enough in his wallet to cover even MOAR sec checks.

    • Tomato Thetan

      I know it’s wrong of me, but I’d sure like to see this info become a matter of public record:

      –The expectations for Cruise’s contact and visitation schedule with Suri and the terms of the divorce agreement.

      –The role that Cruise’s membership in the Church of Scientology played in his decisions regarding his visitation and communication with Suri.

      Will Cruise really let this case go forward, knowing how exposed he and his beloved Scientology would be? Hard to imagine.

  • Bob

    I agree that there was never any formal science involved. But the assertion that there was no backup? Hubbard had tried Dianetics out on numerous people and had multiple accounts from others regarding the results. I assume Vance has audited others. This is part of the process that convinces one that Dianetics seems to work. Because it does seem to give release and make the person happier and more able to deal with subjects that were heretofore upsetting to the person. If it is a scam it is a scam that sometimes causes enough fireworks to look real.
    “So, yes, Hubbard is basically asserting things as true without any backup … but at least he gets sort of honest about it later on in life by telling his followers that they too can and should play PT Barnum, especially when proselytizing. In a later book, Hubbard actually defines Truth as that which raises your “tone level” (i.e. makes you feel good).”

    • BuryTheNuts2

      Ice cream is truth?
      That was easy.
      See how succinct Dianutty “could” have been.

      • Bob

        Bury- 🙂 There you go. You just summarized The Self Analysis book.

    • Anecdotal stories do not equate to scientific evidence. They are, well, just stories and accounts.

      • Bob

        Deckard- I never did say they did. But Hubbard did. That was his proof. And his first hand auditing of others and the result of that. That was his backup. I am not asserting whether that was valid or not. Just that he did not just make up that it worked. He saw that it worked for him.

        • It “worked” for him in that he got a lot of other people to buy into his scam, thereby getting him lots of power and money. And nothing of anything else: his private life was an utter shambles, he had zero ethics, he lived in fear, and he was far more physically unhealthy than he needed to be.

    • Missionary Kid

      Actually, according to a neighbor of mine who attended a gathering that LRH put on when he was ensconced in Phoenix, he did tell people that they should play PT Barnum. He told the listeners to follow him, and they would all get rich.

      He was a snake oil salesman from the beginning.

      • Bob

        I have no doubt. He never eschewed money and he liked having it. But he craved attention and adoration.

        • Missionary Kid

          He also let very little of it trickle down to anyone else. The pitch that if they followed him they’d get rich was another con.

  • I love doing L. Ron’s voice. Kind of like William S. Burroughs, but he tends to not drop his voice at the pauses.

    • Captain Howdy

      You’re comparing my “Pope” to Long Con Blubbard ? I’m deeply offended !

      • stillgrace

        That was great!! I am now taking my copy of “The Cat Within” on my upcoming road trip!
        Thanks for the reminder. The original and long-lasting beatnik!

      • Considering that they once worked together, I just find the links between them fascinating. Ron, by all reports, was scared witless of Bill, since he actually was most of the things he pretended to be…and he was gay, too!

  • Observer

    What I am taking away from today’s lesson:

    1. UFOs possess the ability to transform AK-47s into guitars.
    2. Hubbard kept his intelligence in a test tube.
    3. Hubbard had 50 to 100 sentient engrams, and they were the ones doing the talking.
    4. Dianetics is scientifically proven to be 100% effective without any scientific proof.

    • actually, there’s a pic doing the rounds on the net of some guy in Africa who converted an AK-47 into a saxaphone….

  • Artoo45

    Wright’s and Miscavige Hill’s books have really changed the way I view the relationship of Hubbard to his “tech.” The concept of taking his books, with their obsessions with inadequacy, “tone”, abortion, dominance, grandiosity and control, and seeing them as Hubbard’s psyche turned inside out and laid bare for all to see is fascinating . . . and deeply unsettling. This concept shouldn’t surprise me, but these two books, and now this series of deconstructions, are really bringing it to life for me.

    • TheHoleDoesNotExist

      Know what you mean there, Artoo. When I came to that crossroad and moved forward, all the chunks as well as bits and pieces just fell into place as one gigantic series of “Being Hubbard”. Now I look Behind him…who was he with at such and such time or event? It was the fascinating and volatile or brilliant or pioneer people around (or under) him that breathed life into his compounding fantasies and kept him and his illness going, and growing.

  • Bob

    In all my years I have not seen any marked change in intelligence in Scnrs I have been around, based on progressing up the bridge. Hubbards quote, “a cleared cannibal is a cleared cannibal” seems to apply. The people who were ditz’s when they got into Scn are now OT VIII ditz’s. and as for me; my intelligence started swindling, I mean dwindling the more entrenched I became in Psyentology. When I had the ultimate epiphany(I was brainwashed) I also realized I was a lot smarter than I was made to feel by the Clamatologists around me!
    In fact I now notice I have achieved a status as an intellectual deprogrammed giant in a land of sciebonetic pygmies. 🙂

    • VickiStubing

      Are those the same pygmies Elwrong slept with? Or did he sleep with the cannibals? Or the Aborigines? He did so many amazing things that I can’t keep them all straight. I did figure that he was the Great White Hunter of wallets.

      • Bob

        LOL! No really it was not money Hubbard craved. I can attest to that having watched him every day for a fair stretch of time. It was adoration, admiration and a rapt audience that he loved and needed continuously. The great slight, I mean great white hunter of diminutive size known COB has set his sights on the big trophy wallets and many now hang on his wall, all stuffed with wads and wads of cash.

        • Trustmeonthis

          I see this, too. LRH wanted adoration; DM assumes the adoration and wants cash.
          Strange Angel, that book about JPL co-founder Jack Parsons was a real eye-opener. I’m reading The Sociopath Next Door after this!

          • Bob

            Yes. Power goes beyond adoration. DM likes power and control. He also appears to take pleasure from others pain. A true sociopath. Looks like you are reading the right book.

  • Ze Moo

    Body Thetans came about after enough people went ‘clear’ and the promised results did not show up. Lron had to blame something besides his ‘tech’ for the lack of ‘clear’ powers. Additional mental powers were always the promised endpoint to dianetic auditing. Beghe can cry ‘show me a mo-fo clear’ all he wants, he knows he’ll never find one.

    So here you are, around the year 1964 and after 10 years of Dianetics and Scientology no one is really ‘clear’ and so many people have reached the top of the pyramid that income has started to nose dive. How do you afford the latest Explorer Club cuff links and drinking glasses?? Hey, let’s duct tape more training levels and auditing on top of ‘clear’ and make mo money!!

    So, the OT levels are born of endless research (hey where are my Explorer Club glasses??) and the faithful minions need keepers to sell them on the path to OTness. Thus the Sea Org is born, keepers of the ‘tech’ and the anointed of Lron. Some poor schmuck has to keep the ‘new meat’ coming in and the old meat paying for more of the promised ‘super powers’. The Sea Org are meant to take the place of the Mission Holders. By centralizing the cash flow, Lron gets MO Money. Yeah, it screws the Mission Holders, but they didn’t invent/discover the ‘tech’.

    When you finally get to the current end of OTness, OT8, you find that everything is whatever you believe it is. If you believe you can influence parking spots by just thinking about them, you have Lrons super powers. If you believe you can stuff dying ‘spirits’ back into their physical bodies, you have Lrons super powers. “What’s true for you is true for you”, reality need not impinge. That way lies dissassociative effect disorder and ultimately schizophrenia.

    If you keep sliding the performance scale around you can define anything as anything you want and never have to give or demonstrate one real tangible ‘power’ to anyone. That is what the con is about, keep the cash flow moving and the ‘faithful’ busy. If they aren’t kept busy, they may wander away or actually notice there are no ‘OTs’, let alone ‘clears’.

  • “Hubbard says we all know the feeling when a certain person makes us feel stupid.”

    More evidence that all Scientologists through time and around the world were and are working on Hubbard’s case, and only his. That guy couldn’t subsume his emotions to save his life. I can imagine that he had lots of opportunities to be made to feel stupid as his absurd notions were brushed aside or laughed at by educated people. It seems to have enturbulated him irreparably.

  • dbloch7986

    I read Dianetics a couple of times because I was trying to figure out why I was not a perfect human being and I thought the only source of information available to me was Hubbfatdumbfuckard’s.

    Then I discovered the internet and held in the palm of my hand the entirety of information amassed by human civilization over the years.

    Thank science for the Age of Information in which a few keystrokes can deliver almost any information you need in fractions of a second. This is the undoing of Scientology.

    Now if only the justice systems across the United States would catch up, maybe this cult would be prosecuted out of existence.

    • sugarplumfairy

      Amen, Derek..

    • BosonStark

      So true. Understanding and knowledge isn’t contingent on a secret method or process , or the total absorption in the way of one person like Dr. Hubtard and his rule-the-planet space cadets with “all the answers,” it’s having access to everyone’s ideas and information, and trying to understand that.

      When this cult tries to stay scientific, sacred, and secret — it’s really just incredible, that people who weren’t born into it, can devote their lives to the Sea Org, or donate $20M to them.

      The Internet doesn’t mean that we’re going to be able to understand what it all means. It just helps us to understand that we’re not alone, and help us avoid some traps here and there, and that there’s going to be a fewer things that are kept secret.

      Some people mourn that loss of mystery. They want to believe in secrets — things they are privy to that no one else knows. I don’t. I like getting different viewpoints and people’s opinions. There are plenty of mysteries without these hyper controlling groups concocting them, like Scientology with its billion dollar propaganda machine, and cloistered scilebrities — The Holy Order of the “Xenu Who?”

      • VickiStubing

        ACK! (seriously, you hit the nail on the head)

      • TheHoleDoesNotExist

        Exactly. Decades ago one’s problems or behavior was ignored or hidden in the closet or labelled eccentric in those “dark ages”. In Google age, now you Know you’re screwed up. But that’s a huge forward step. You still have to make a choice of getting help or not, but you are more likely to find a support system around you then not, which was the opposite situation not too long ago.

        As far as mysteries, there are so many More now. Like, what the hell is a scientology frock? Where are they kept? Are there color choices and do they come in Egyptian cotton? I never saw one or even heard about them, not even on the OT levels. I never got mine. Where is it now? Is someone else wearing mine? Lots of mysteries yet to explore.

    • EnthralledObserver

      Hahaha… bitter much??? But, of course, I agree with the moniker… 😉

  • Sherbet

    What I can never get over is that JT and TC — both of whom rumored to be not the brightest of bulbs and one a “cured” dyslexic — can understand this doubletalk or any of lrh’s impenetrable alleged scripture. Yet they must have learned something, or else they could not have achieved their respective OT levels. I don’t get it.

    • VickiStubing

      Maybe they can keep all this Hubtardian doubletalk straight through rote memorization. They ARE actors, after all. Besides, I doubt they waste much time enjoying classic literature or watching good films or going to the opera or the symphony or even cavorting on the beach. Didn’t TC whine about not being able to go on holiday, as he had too many car accident victims to tend to? No time for anything but KSW!

  • scnethics

    “We all know the feeling when a certain person makes us feel stupid.”

    Ironically, there may be no one who has ever made more people feel stupid than Hubbard, and he is far from done. What a legacy!

  • 0tessa

    I started reading Dianetics way back in 1978, but didn’t come far. After 30 to 40 pages I was completely lost. Maybe I was not intelligent enough, I thought. But then I discovered that I was not the only one. Quite some people did not seem to be able to digest the book. It was not our ‘fault’, it was the book that was a mystery. Or a mystification.
    In fact I’ve never met anybody who read the book from A to Z. That is telling. It is undigestable, no matter how you ‘cook’ it.

    • q-bird

      man-O-man… Otessa & Boston Stark – you are saying here what I have felt and thought for so many years. The woman who I bought the book from said that it had completely changed her life & I believed her & I wanted o understand this book. OMG & I could not!! And I really tried… twice I put in the effort. I was working on sailboats, out at sea, and got so pissed… at it… at myself for failing to understand it, that I threw it overboard. Yeah, deep-sixed it – gave it to Davey Jones Locker. My captain to me, “What did you just throw overboard?” A paperback book. “Why?” Because I can NOT understand it! “What was it about?” I DO NOT F’in’ KNOW, I got NO idea!!!

      Well, it comforts me to know that I am not alone in this lack of understanding. Thank you guys.

      • 0tessa

        Glad to be of service!

  • BosonStark

    Besides it being a meandering pile of crap, this series has helped me realize why I couldn’t read all of Dianutty a few years ago when with the help of Xenu, I made the effort. (I know Xenu is being kept by an electronic force field in his mountain prison, but I always feel him at my side, when it comes to Sciloontology anyway.)

    I had other problems too. As I was reading, I kept hearing Hubbard’s voice saying the words, like in one of his lectures, and it simulated my gag reflex. I’ve read a few other Scientology books and didn’t have that problem as much, but they were boring.

    Thanks to you and Vance for unlocking the secrets — I mean glaring contradictions. I could never get over it being so overblown, and the idea that if Haggis didn’t read it, and spent so many years as a cult devotee, how was I, a mere wog, supposed to get through it?

    • moxonmoxoff

      “meandering pile of crap”–that’s the phrase i was looking for. you got it!

      i am enjoying the deconstruction of said pile of crap . . . .

  • Jefferson Hawkins

    Well spotted, Tony. This is one of the key lynchpins of Scientological thinking. “It doesn’t matter if the theory is correct, all that matters is that it works.” If you get into a discussion with a Scientologist, eventually you get this rubric. Hubbard lied about his life and his accomplishments? Doesn’t matter. The only test is, does the technology work. OT III is fanciful space opera? Doesn’t matter. The only test is, does it work.

    But what is the standard they set for workability? Hubbard also set the pace for that in 1950. There actually were researchers who tried Dianetics and found the results, in a controlled study, to be disappointing. Hubbard’s answer? They were doing it wrong. They hadn’t applied it correctly. Because, of course, if you apply it correctly, it works. This bit of circular logic would eventually be enshrined in Keeping Scientology Working. Scientology works 100% of the time if applied correctly. If it doesn’t work, it wasn’t applied correctly. QED.

    Of course, this “logic” could be used to prove that anything works – phrenology, astrology, ouija boards, you name it. Oh, it didn’t work? Well, you weren’t doing it right.

    This gets so ingrained in a Scientologist’s thinking that if they run into a failure using the tech, their immediate thought is “I didn’t do it correctly.” If they get a win with Scientology, their immediate thought is “Hubbard was right.”

    They remember the wins as “correct applications” and the losses as “misapplications,” and so the belief that “it always works when correctly applied” is reinforced.

    • TheHoleDoesNotExist

      Well said. Just add that other loop “you’re PTS” and then you have the perfect Pretzel Logic.

    • moxonmoxoff

      quite the logical conundrum. you’ve expressed it perfectly here!

    • Sid Snakey

      …and the only stories they hear from other Scientologists are their “wins” which they are encouraged to share, as opposed to their case (which contains their problems), which they are forbidden from discussing.

  • Captain Howdy

    This is probably old news but I found this interview with Jenna Miscavige Hill on of all possible venues the Opie and Anthony Show. At first I was like “NOOOOO, does she have any idea who these guys are ?” Apparently they have toned down their act since the last time I heard them (10 yrs at least). There’s only one swear word and they seem smitten with Jenna..

    • Sandy

      she was on our local Fox affiliate this morning – really good interview. So, she is still on the circuit …

    • Did anybody else read that as the Opie and Aunt Bee Show?

  • mook

    interesting article from Freedumb Magazine in 1987 with a young Paul Haggis. does anybody know if Julia Migenes is still in CoS?

    • Sherbet

      There’s so much hyperbole in that article, my head hurts. This could be a drinking game: Every time a cos publication, video, flyer, or press release uses the inflated and vague number “millions” to count the scibots who (we are supposed to believe) are happily studying scn at this very moment, bottoms up!

    • TheHoleDoesNotExist

      This article is from 2006.

      Sounds open minded to me and that’s not unusual. She’s been outspoken n the past about scientology. I wonder if she’s still deaf to the antigay in scientology? In searching, I found an amazing 1986 article about a music casette that was mailed out in Tampa Bay area of sci celebs and songs they wrote/performed on that I would so love to get ahold of. The article is Clearwater Times’ author Wilma Norton. There’s a Wilma Norton at St Pete College. Not sure if the Cable show is around, but a video would be superb.

      “CLEARWATER — Call this music cassette The L. Ron Shuffle.

      A celebrity group of L. Ron Hubbard’s followers — including John
      Travolta, Chick Corea, Karen Black, Leif Garrett and Sylvester
      Stallone’s brother Frank — have put together a pop-music cassette of 10
      songs whose lyrics and music are said to have been written by the
      Scientology founder before his death.

      The cassettes have been mailed to more than 600 “various local people in Clearwater,”
      Scientology spokesman Ludwig Alpers said, and will be sent to “quite a few more.”
      A 30-minute video of the recording session has also been played on Tampa Cable Television Inc.’s public access channel,Alpers said. A Tampa Cable spokesman said the Scientologists have a 30-minute weekly program on the channel.”

      • Artoo45

        Oh, man, I would pay good money for a copy of that cassette. I hope it has Karen Black singing Thank You For Listening. How awesome would that be?

  • Ze Moo

    Travolta noted, the event raised more than $400,000.“That will put 70 first-responders through the detox program,” Travolta said, noting up to 30 of those slots are expected to be in Marion County.”

    That means they are charging a little under 6 thousand dollars to sit in a sauna and take vitamins. Please visit and comment. Lots of “I love J. Travolta and want everyone to detox” crap.

    • thought I’d share my comment I put there:

      There is absolutely no medical evidence backing up scientology’s quack treatments…. period! In fact all the scientology drug treatment fronts [mainly Narconon] are currently under massive litigation and are losing and having to pay out big time. Just Google Narconon and court case to see for yourself. Travolta should be ashamed to still be fronting these highly dangerous scientology drug treatments that are proven killers.

  • Sid Snakey

    Vance – My reading of Tony’s story of Adamiak was that the storyteller Tony heard was not actually claiming to have been present herself, rather she had heard the story from Adamiak. This is the key issue. The most plausible way to tell a lie is to get someone else to tell the lie who genuinely believes it to be true. Adamiak was simply a liar, she would not have been able to pause and exclaim how true the story was, but the credulous friend was not thinking critically about the truth of the story.

    I remember once, as a credulous youth, re-telling a story from my brother who had told me socialism and communism were nonsense because if you divided up all the wealth in the country and distributed it evenly we’d only have 50c each. Now I could simply have got out a calculator and done the maths and realised that was nonsense, but since the story came from my elder (and much admired) brother I took it at face value without further evaluation.

    There is another unfortunate tendency in human nature and that is to exaggerate, especially when telling a story.

    Combine the tendency to exaggerate with the tendency to believe stories told by others, and the benefits (to Scientology) of the strongly encouraged practice of sharing wins becomes obvious. Add this to the belief in Scientology that if it’s not working it must be you, combine the rule of not discussing your own case, and you have credulous Scientologists believing that the tech works (at least for other people), and persisting through level after level, dollar after dollar, waiting for the miraculous benefits of Scientology to occur.

    In the case of Tony’s storyteller, the liar was Adamiak, the storyteller was telling her genuine perception of the truth. In the case of Scientology, the liar was Hubbard, and most Scientologists since then have been telling what they believe to be the truth.

  • I feel obliged to point this out.

    To: “And, in fact, more than 60 years later, there’s no independent corroboration of engrams being stored in cellular protoplasm, or a perfectly-recording analytical mind, or the presence of a reactive mind and its nefarious influence.”

    This isn’t a secret or anything, and Hubbard stopped asserting this quite early on in Dianetics.

    “A heavy facsimile used to be known as an engram. In view of the fact that it has been found to be
    stored elsewhere than in the cells, the term heavy facsimile has now come into use.” – Advanced Procedure & Axioms, Effort Processing

    • sugarplumfairy

      I feel obliged to point this out.. lrh was a liar and a conman.. Not to mention a thief, a bigamist, a tax evader, a drug abuser, a pseudo-satanist, a racist, a misogynist, a plagiarist, a fake war hero, a malingerer, a schizophrenic and a megalomaniacal sociopath.. hmmmm.. Did I leave anything out?

      • sugarplumfairy

        Oh, yeah.. and a really baaaad husband and father..

        • Whether or not he was a liar or a conman or any of the other things has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not engrams are stored in cellular protoplasm.
          So yeah, you left something out, the topic at hand—completely.

          • Captain Howdy

            The more I hear from you the more you sound like vaLLarrr.

          • scnethics

            No one is discussing whether Dianetics works or not. This isn’t something we can discuss, is it? The only controlled study ever done on Dianetics did not show it to be effective. You know about the placebo effect? That a drug or therapy must prove it’s positive effects are not due to placebo effect before any scientist would say it is effective? Hubbard certainly did know about placebo effect. He had plenty of money and people to design such a study (or many studies) to confirm the efficacy of his therapeutic methods and gain broad acceptance, but he never dared put any of it to the test.

            What is being discussed in this series is the book Dianetics, the claims Hubbard asserted in it, the force with which he made these assertions, the way he then made sure to give himself outs. If you look carefully, you’ll see that he was beginning construction on the trap he spent his entire life building.

          • Sherbet

            John, I think what people are trying to say is, lrh’s character flaws ARE the point, because if he was such a dishonest man, why should anyone believe he’s not lying about his findings and “research”?

          • sugarplumfairy

            Certainly good to know you’re not trying to defend mother hubbard.. And reeeeally good to know how much you value facts, logic, science and knowledge.. If I’m not mistaken, you just BRILLIANTLY demonstrated ‘truth by assertion..’

          • Einstein did not claim that understanding his theories would lead to one not losing their teeth.
            Hubbard claimed that his scam would lead to perfect health and happiness. Hubbard had neither health nor happiness. He set himself up as an ethical leader, and proceeded to be completely unethical.

            General relativity flows from the facts. It builds on previous knowledge, and has been proven through rigorous study.
            Dianetics directly contradicts everything we know about the human brain. As in, everything. It cannot possibly work, any more than a human being can flap her arms to fly.

            why does it seem like nobody on this website actually has an operational sense of reasoning?

            Because you do not.

      • moxonmoxoff

        wife beater, kidnapper, coward . . .

      • N. Graham

        Fraud, charlatan, OCD denier (laundry done upteen times), pervert (underage girls in hotpants dressing him each morning (yuck), check-kiter, child abuser (children in the chain locker), assault artist (overboarding) and sadist (pushing peanuts with nose), the list goes on…
        Also, I think you were giving him a bit of a break when you called him a sociopath as opposed to a psychopath although if anyone could be called both, it is LRH.

      • An absolutely terrible writer.

    • Captain Howdy

      “By his own admission, Hubbard made what he considered was one of the greatest mistakes of his life when he used the biological definition of engram as a “trace on a cell”, which was not in line with the proper biological definition”

      In other words he claimed something that he realized somewhere down the road could be easily disproved scientifically, so he retracted that claim to cover his ass which I’ve seen him do numerous times in my readings.

      • What he was doing was to try to quote from a scientific paper on how memories are stored, which used the word “engram” in a way that LRH did not understand.

    • scnethics

      Right, Effort Processing. That’s what caused all those people to throw away their eyeglasses after a single session, correct? Or did Hubbard quit asserting that at a later date as well?

    • EnthralledObserver

      Why the hell does he get away with claiming it in the first place? You don’t get to say’ it IS this, it’s proven, it’s fact…’ in writing and then say ‘Ooops, my bad, I didn’t look properly,’ without losing a great deal of your credibility. What else is fact, and then not fact at a later date, that LRon just didn’t get around to ‘recanting’ because he DIED?’ At what point do we conclude that LRon’s versions are NOW correct and proven?

      • N. Graham

        Well, when it all comes down to it, OT8 says it’s ALL mocked up.

        • EnthralledObserver

          Oh, the final recant then, eh? lol OR, was there to be another one after that. You just never know with LRon, so it’s best to assume the whole lot is FALSE, innit? :p

  • Chocolate Velvet

    New filings yesterday in TC’s lawsuit against Life &Style. I think it is a terrible idea for him to push this. It looks like the publisher is pushing back with questions about scientology’s influence on his decisions. Disconnection, anyone? This could get interesting. — until they decide to settle, or drop the suit, anyway.


  • off topic, but is OCMB down? It’s not responding on my machine but is.

  • Sherbet

    Here’s a fun nightcap, and something I’d never heard before. I just saw it on Operation Clambake:

    “Some of Ron’s adventures at sea were later made into a Hollywood film, ‘Mr. Roberts’, with the lead part played by Henry Fonda.”

    – A Short Biography of L. Ron Hubbard, “The Auditor” issue 63

    • Captain Howdy

      So who was Jack Lemmon suppose to be ? Sherbert ,”Mr Roberts” came out in 1955, so don’t believe everything you read on Clambake. Ready for moar snow ? I just got done watching “The Master” and I was digging the MA. ref’s.

      • Sherbet

        Zat you, Howdy? You’re the only other Masshole I know. I think you misunderstood. “The Auditor,” a cos publication, reported that nonsense about lrh being the inspiration for the movie “Mr. Roberts,” which, incidentally was written as a play in 1948.

        • N. Graham

          This is from: (Carnegie Mellon University)
          “While aboard he wrote a revolutionary textbook on navigation, greatly simplifying the art (“L. Ron Hubbard: Master Mariner/Yachtsman”, 1996). Some of his adventures aboard the USS Algol were later made into a Hollywood film, Mr. Roberts, by his screenwriter friends (“A Brief Biography of L. Ron Hubbard”, 1960; also Hubbard, “Autobiographical notes for Peter Tompkins”, 6 June 1972)”.
          Here’s a mention from a U.S. Navy site, LRH appears in the “Mr. Roberts Movie Trivia” at the head of the second column:

          There are dozens of less scholarly sites that prove that at the least someone was spreading that story. Gee, who in Scientology would ever fabricate something like that? Maybe someone that thinks a DC8 looks like a spaceship?

          • Sherbet

            There really is no limit to lrh’s BS, is there…

        • Captain Howdy

          I didn’t misunderstand ,I just had too much torpedo juice ! This dang disqus, you try to delete a comment and it just changes it to ‘guest”. POS

          • Sherbet

            Well, you’re always a welcome Guest.

      • Sherbet

        And, NO, I’ve had enough snow!

      • N. Graham

        I’ve heard that before too. I’m sure LRH meant HE was the hero, Mr. Roberts (Henry Fonda), but I’d put him at more of a James Cagney. Especially how he adored the plant that Ensign Pulver throws overboard at the end of the film. I think some of the outtakes show him attaching wires to the plant’s leaves.

        • Sherbet

          Stuck on a ship captained by the inept braggart Hubbard, the plant would throw itself overboard.

          • N. Graham

            Good point. I wonder if overboarding began when his actual crewmates would throw themselves overboard to get away from his stories.

            • EnthralledObserver

              Oh, come now, that isn’t fair. By all accounts LRon was quite the story teller. Had a bit of a knack for that. And given that it is a shame he didn’t stick to make believe… oh, wait…

  • WOW – just when you might think the Jenna story was losing a little steam the UK Sun has put it back front and centre!

    At 6, I was on a chain gang. At 7, I signed a billion-year membership contract. At 13, I was quizzed on my sex life. At 17, I tried to jump off a roof

    Scientology leader’s niece Jenna Miscavige on growing up in a cult

    Read more:

    • scnethics


    • blissfulldreams

      it’s really good i like the bit at the bottom “jargon” where it educates the masses in sciono-speak

  • EnthralledObserver

    Marty’s new post is touting the hypocrisy of Scientologists using Disconnection… and I still can’t post. What is the term for a hypocritical hypocrit?

    • Overtigo

      Squirrel, I think ; )

      • EnthralledObserver

        HAHA… but, of course!

    • While its hard for me fo follow the scientology jargon, I think i know what he is trying to say, “Ive been declared an SP, but if you follow my logic I am still a good LRH scientologist.”. It sounds like he is trying to change the rules so the brainwashed drones will flock to him when DM is indicted. I will always believe he has an ulterior motive of taking over the church, or a portion of it. Billions of dollars at stake.

      • EnthralledObserver

        Whilst I know very little about Marty’s goals, I definitely agree that MONEY is his greatest motivator in his effort to breathe life and tout the successes of the ‘subject’ of Scientology as opposed to the CO$, for sure. LRon and his ramblings is the tool he is using to bait those who might give him the cash… absolutely.

  • blissfulldreams

    off topic

    TONY i keep getting this message when i try to access My Disqus


    You don’t have permission to access /2013/02/15/epic-fireball-over-russia/ on this server.

    Additionally, a 500 Internal Server Error error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

    • Observer

      I get that one all the time too. I think it’s just because the site is so busy.

      • blissfulldreams

        ok thank you

  • dwayners13

    If I understand Hubbard correctly, he is trying to explain that the underlying theory behind Dianetics is based on years of scientic research, however the theory may not be based on scientific facts, but that doesn’t matter because Dianetics never fails to clear the reactive mind, which may or may not be real. Furthermore, not only are scientific facts irrelevant to the success of Dianetics, they don’t require any scientific evaluation to be considered facts, they just need to be true for Hubbard & perhaps the person receiving Dianetic therapy. So because Dianetic theory never fails to clear the reactive, (which again, may not exist) the possibility that it may be based on incorrect assumptions is irrelevant.
    This may sound absolutely absurd to most people, however it assures that even if Hubbard’s ‘research’ is proven to be a bunch of BS, it doesn’t matter because, (once again) it doesn’t have to be proven to be fact, it just has to be true for you, which it is because Hubbard said it was true.
    Hubbard could have saved himself & the reader a lot of time by just saying, “trust me, it’s works”.

  • Roger Larsson

    The money, power and fame engrams Hubbard had created money, power and fame secondaries in preclears.

    A faith in a scam is a religion as well as a faith in the truth.

    Hubbard, the director, made body thetans to the bad guys and preclears to the good guys.

    To have body thetans as SUPER STARS exorcising preclears can be an idea as well.

  • Midwest Mom,

    Wrote earlier to try to convince you to keep posting on Tony’s blog. I know that the web can be uninviting to Catholics. There’s a lot of misinformation that needs to be corrected. You are missed and respected in the community of Tony’s blog. Please consider coming back.

    • Mary_McConnell

      I don’t know what happened but you have my support on your comment. As a Christian and former Scientologist, I know how mean and thoughless people can be in their attacks on other people’s free choice to believe in what they want. Come back Midwest Mom. Ignore the naysayers and thread derailers.

  • Mary_McConnell

    Not confused at all. I just love these reviews by you and Vance. Lots of chuckles and information.

    I just finished up reading Vance’s excellent book and will post a review over at Amazon soon.