Hello , I am an ex Scientologist , this blog is primarily about that but I may address other topics as the mood hits me to . I was in Scientology for 25 years and spent about 10,000 hours using the indoctrination and thought reform method "study tech " . I also spent time on staff and met hundreds of Scientologists and did hundreds of the cult practices . Many were the "ethics cycles and OW writeups " that really are an attempt to suppress or remove a person's identity and replace it with a mental pseudo clone of Ron Hubbard . To make a fanatical slave for the cult .

I looked outside the cult for answers in about January 2014 and left the cult in about March of 2014 . While in about 99% of members have no idea of the truth .

We are told we are in a mental therapy or spiritual enhancement or religion or science for helping people unlock potential . Or any of several other fronts that all pretend kind and humanitarian goals .

The truth is Scientology is a terrorist mind control cult and this blog is my attempt to understand and expose that . And try to state as clearly as possible the tools that I have found helpful in dealing with this .

Sunday, April 17, 2016

Scientific Method - Sort Of , Defining Terms Part 1

Scientology has as one of its biggest criticisms that it doesn't follow or yield to scientific method. The term scientific method is to a very strict standard misleading. Now don't get me wrong - Scientology is a fraud that intentionally was made to deceive, fool and even covertly enslave victims. The "research" Ron Hubbard claimed is almost all entirely false or at best knowingly and intentionally misrepresented.

But the blanket term scientific method includes the way a chemist would work and a theoretical physicist and a psychologist. They use very different procedures to investigate ideas and observable phenomena. 

Science is ultimately the study of nature. It includes looking at and measuring and thinking about nature. It has gained tools that are used to try to eliminate or reduce errors. The tools are also used to try and make developments measurable, quantifiable and repeatable in comparable situations. It's also meant to have falsifiable claims. That means ones that can be supported by observations or shown to be less likely or wrong.

To be clear Scientology is packed with claims that truly cannot be verified or falsified. Many of Hubbard's claims are backed up by his alleged "whole track research". That's his term for events thousands, millions, billions, trillions and quadrillions of years ago which he claims exact knowledge of. There's no realistic way to prove or disprove the events he claimed, but they are the foundation that many hundreds of his other ideas rest upon.

A claim that cannot be proven, meaning supported by relevant evidence or falsified, meaning shown to be contradicted or disproven is often seen as outside of science. Efforts to reduce the effects of confirmation bias are also seen as part of science and many tools fit this description.  To help illustrate my point I have quoted an article that lays out the term scientific method and why some frown on its use. 

Begin quote: The scientific method. Many science textbooks, including those in psychology, present science as a monolithic “method.” Most often, they describe this method as a hypothetical-deductive recipe, in which scientists begin with an overarching theory, deduce hypotheses (predictions) from that theory, test these hypotheses, and examine the fit between data and theory. If the data are inconsistent with the theory, the theory is modified or abandoned. It’s a nice story, but it rarely works this way (McComas, 1996). Although science sometimes operates by straightforward deduction, serendipity and inductive observations offered in the service of the “context of discovery” also play crucial roles in science. For this reason, the eminent philosopher of science Popper (1983) quipped that, “As a rule, I begin my lectures on Scientific Method by telling my students that the scientific method does not exist…” (p. 5).

Contrary to what most scientists themselves appear to believe, science is not a method; it is an approach to knowledge (Stanovich, 2012). Specifically, it is an approach that strives to better approximate the state of nature by reducing errors in inferences. Alternatively, one can conceptualize science as a toolbox of finely honed tools designed to minimize mistakes, especially confirmation bias – the ubiquitous propensity to seek out and selectively interpret evidence consistent with our hypotheses and to deny, dismiss, and distort evidence that does not (Tavris and Aronson, 2007;Lilienfeld, 2010). Not surprisingly, the specific research methods used by psychologists bear scant surface resemblance to those used by chemists, astrophysicists, or molecular biologists. Nevertheless, all of these methods share an overarching commitment to reducing errors in inference and thereby arriving at a more accurate understanding of reality.

Excerpted from:

Fifty psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid: a list of inaccurate, misleading, misused, ambiguous, and logically confused words and phrases

  • 1Department of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
  • 2Department of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA
  • 3Binghamton University – State University of New York, Binghamton, NY, USA
  • 4Department of Psychology, Sacred Heart College, Fairfield, CT, USA

Sunday, April 10, 2016

Why Lying And Murder Are Justified In Scientology Part 3

 Image result for ron series scientology observer father of liesImage result for ron series scientology observer father of liesImage result for ron series scientology observer father of lies

Hubbard made his ethics technology an excuse to have people behave in an unethical way to ensure his control over them would be complete.

                         HCO ETHICS ORDER To:        Those Concerned              No. 30 INT
                                        E/O No. 28 INT added to
From:      The Founder
Subject:   RACKET EXPOSED               6th March 1968
(BPI and goes in Auditor)
                         POLLY STATHIS
                         PETER GOODWIN
                         JIM STATHIS
                         PETER KNIGHT
                         MRS. KNIGHT
                         NORA GOODWIN
                         RON FROST
                         MARGARET FROST
                         NINA COLLINGWOOD
                         FREDA GAIMAN
                         FRANK MANLEY
                         MARY ANN TAYLOR
                         GEORGE WATERIDGE
are hereby declared Suppressive Persons for pretending to have and distribute
forged and altered "Upper Level Materials" which were of a Research nature
and not for distribution.
All Certificates and Awards are cancelled.
1.   Having stolen or illegally procured these dangerous materials (at the
     instigation of a Psychiatrist) these persons did plot to misuse them to
     cause Insanity and Death.
2.   False report for money that they would furnish the real materials.
3.   They are declared Enemies of mankind, the planet and all life.
4.   They are fair game.
5.   No amnesty may ever cover them.
6.   If they ever come to a Qual Division they are to be run on reverse
7.   Any Sea Org member contacting any of them is to use Auditing Process
8.   The Criminals Prosecution Bureau is to find any and all crimes in their
     pasts and have them brought to court and prison.
The Public Distribution of False or Forbidden or Dangerous Data is a
Suppressive Act and a High Crime.
                                               L. RON HUBBARD
«R2-45 - an enormously effective process for exteriorization, but its use is frowned upon by this society at this time.» — Ron Hubbard, The Creation of Human Ability
«Exteriorization: The state of the thetan, the individual himself, being outside his body. [...] the state achieved in which the thetan can be outside his body with certainty» — Ron Hubbard, The Phoenix Lectures, 1968

The purpose of Ethics is:
And having accomplished that the purpose becomes
Thus progress can be made by all
Many mechanisms can exist to mask a counter-intention
One has an intention to expand the org. An "expert" says it is difficult as "The building society...." The impules is to then handle the problem presented by the "expert," whereas the correct ETHICS actions is to remove his counter-intentionedness or other-intentionedness. If he were an EXPERT he would simply say, "Okay. I'll handle my end of the expansion."
There are many ways to handle counter- and other-intentionedness
There is a fine lin between Ethics and Tech
The point where a thetan goes mad is very exact. It is the point where he begins to obsessively stop something. From this the effort becomes generalized and he begins to stop lots of other things. When this includes anyone who or anything that would help him as well as thos people and things that help, the being is suppressive. His intentions counter any other intention, particularly good intentions.
Other-intentionedness comes from unawareness or dispersal. It is handled by removing things which disperse others. Offering bottled medicine to cure "the blues" is a direct distraction. It is the purveyor of the distraction who is the target.
The person who enters a Scientology group to then sell other-answer is of course an enemy.
However we go about accomplishing the above is the action of ethics. The above is the purpose.
                                                  RON HUBBARD

"Life bleeds. It suffers. It hungers. And it has to have the right to shoot its enemies until such time as comes a golden age." Ron Hubbard The Responsibilities Of Leaders HCOPL also found in Introduction To Scientology Ethics book
"the foremost law, if one’s ambition is to win, is of course to win."
Ron Hubbard The Responsibilities Of Leaders HCOPL also found in Introduction To Scientology Ethics book
"He doesn’t have to know all the bad news and if he’s a power really, he won’t ask all the time, “What are all those dead bodies doing at the door?” And if you are clever, you never let it be thought HE killed them — that weakens you and also hurts the power source. “Well, boss, about all those dead bodies, nobody at all will suppose you did it. She over there, those pink legs sticking out, didn’t like me.”
Ron Hubbard The Responsibilities Of Leaders HCOPL also found in Introduction To Scientology Ethics book
"always push power in the direction of anyone on whose power you depend. It may be more money for the power or more ease or a snarling defense of the power to a critic or even the dull thud of one of his enemies in the dark or the glorious blaze of the whole enemy camp as a birthday surprise."
Ron Hubbard The Responsibilities Of Leaders HCOPL also found in Introduction To Scientology Ethics book
"In short, a staff member can get away with murder so long as his statistic is up and can't sneeze without a chop if it's down."
HCOPL 1 Sep 1965 (reissued 5 Oct 1985) "Ethics Protection"
"When people do start reporting a staff member with a high statistic, what you investigate is the person who turned in the report. In an ancient army a particularly brave deed was recognized by an award of the title of Kha-Khan. It was not a rank. The person remained what he was, BUT he was entitled to be forgiven the death penalty ten times in case in the future he did anything wrong. That was a Kha-Khan. That's what producing, high-statistic staff members are - Kha-Khans. They can get away with murder without a blink from Ethics.... And Ethics must recognize a Kha-Khan when it sees one - and tear up the bad report chits on the person with a yawn."
HCOPL 1 Sep 1965 (reissued 5 Oct 1985) "Ethics Protection"

I can close with two brief quotes from Hubbard for your consideration.

"Our organizations are friendly. They are only here to help you."
- . Ron Hubbard, "Dianetic Contract" 23 May 1969
"There is no more ethical group on this planet than ourselves."
- Ron Hubbard, KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING. 7 February 1965, reissued 27 August 1980

"Somebody some day will say ‘this is illegal.’ By then be sure the orgs [Scientology organizations] say what is legal or not."
- Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 4 January 1966, "LRH Relationship to Orgs"

Saturday, April 9, 2016

Taking A BITE Out Of Scientology An Introduction And Overview

Image result for bite model steven hassanImage result for bite model steven hassan

 Image result for steven hassan

I have prepared a five part series of posts on the Scientology cult evaluated against the BITE model developed by Steven Hassan. In the first post I quote the entire BITE model and introduce the work of Steven Hassan with several quotes.

In each of the following posts I take on one part of the model and evaluate Scientology against it.  I collected all five posts here so it's easy to read them in order.

I feel the end result is a deep analysis of both Scientology and the BITE model as well.

Taking A BITE Out Of Scientology Part 1 The BITE Model
Taking A BITE Out Of Scientology Part 2 Behavior Control
Taking A BITE Out Of Scientology Part 3 Information Control
Taking A BITE Out Of Scientology Part 4 Thought Control
Taking A BITE Out Of Scientology Part 5 Emotional Control

Note: Cult expert Rick Ross recently made the following comment on the origin of the bite model:

FYI -- The BITE model is taken from other earlier sources. BITE represents B for behavior as already identified through the academic writings of Singer, Ofshe and others. I is for information as identified by Conway and Siegelman in "Snapping," which they called "Information Disease" (1978). T is for thinking identified by Lifton as thought reform (1961). And finally E is for emotional control, which was identified by Conway and Siegelman in their book "Holy Terror" (1982). I find that acknowledging and using the original material is much better, more precise and useful than spinning it with a new label without proper attribution. It's very important when writing to include footnotes that give proper credit to the originators of ideas and theories by recognizing their hard work and research.