Scientology and other things
-
Daniel Turini wrote: Should he kept writing SF or is he still writing it ? Hubbard is dead, so I don't think he'll be writing anything new any time soon. ;) --Mike-- Best score on the mini-putt game: 27 My really out-of-date homepage Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan and Jamie Salé.
Didn't seem to stop Gene Roddenberry, he seems to have created more tv series since he died than he did when he was alive :-D Michael :-)
-
Just curious but who here is into, knows anything about, or has an opinion on Scientology? To spark some memories Scientology was L Ron Hubbards creation and . Alternatively, has anyone read either of the following two books, if so, what did you think about them? The Fabric of Reality by David Deutsch and The PROPHET by Kahlil Gibran. On a lighter note I just read an article in the latest Time (the one with Bono on the cover saving the world, go Bono!) on page 38 about how MS and Intel are getting very much into mobile phones. The bit that had me in tears of mirth was "We want to help people create the iMac of cell phones" said by none other than the vice president of Microsoft's mobility group. :laugh: . MS striving to be like Apple... :laugh: ;) regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
STAY AWAY FROM SCIENTOLOGY ALL THEY WANT IS YOUR MONEY I had the unfortunate opportunity of being involved with their group in Poole in the UK. I was not very happy at the time and they gave me a questionare and sure enough i would benefit from their re-programming. Not a nice place at all, all they wanted was my money, I gave them over a £1000 nd they still wanted handouts ****************STAY AWAY*************** The Wudan Master
-
I want to clarify what I said above, as reading it back it is a bit bollox. Any organised religion is bollox and usually prays on the gullibility of people. Scientology in my eyes, is no more bollox than any other religion. It's just a way of helping people get through the day. My own problems with Scientology come from some of those dubious legal practises that I've read about. Of course it hasn't been the cause of a major war yet, so I guess that gives it a step up on other religions through history. Paul Watson wrote: So, if all religions are bollocks, what do you believe? I don't have many strong beliefs. I don't believe in a supreme being of any kind. Not a Sun worshipper either. I'm probably more of a Bill and Ted kind of person, "Be excellent to each other". Respect nature and respect each other, as we are all made from the same basic building blocks. Michael :-)
Michael P Butler wrote: My own problems with Scientology come from some of those dubious legal practises that I've read about This is a problem I have with a lot of intelligent people, myself included. We hear about some or other quite amazing thing and think "sounds cool, lets investigate." We then run into the mob surrounding the thing. Often this puts us off straight away and we link that because the mob is interested and into it, that whatever it is, is bollocks. We smarties have a big problem with organised anything, tell me I am wrong. We don't like being told what to do, or being force fed a religion. We like to be in control, have our way and not be brainwashed. I totally agree and that is a good thing, a good thing that we are not sheep. However it seems to sometimes blind us to good things. Another thing is that as with anything successful there are sharks circling it, biting off bits of it and using those bits to their own end. It seems as though Scientology has been a big victim of that. While Scientology itself is not bad, the people who say they are lead Scientologists (an oxymoron really as Scientology is a one person, one universe type of thing) use it's success to get what they want. Unfortunatley the mob often just glosses over that, clamouring to pay more money to the sharks, while us smarties see the sharks and label both the sharks and the religion as bad. It kind of reminds me of Linux. I see all these idiots surrounding it, using it, manipulating it and it makes it harder for Linux to win me over. I know Linux is not really about beating MS, I know that the daft script kiddies and Linuz zealots do not represent what Linux is about, but I also know that if I get involved with Linux other smarties will look down on me with disdain for "having fallen into such a stupid trap." Michael P Butler wrote: I'm probably more of a Bill and Ted kind of person, "Be excellent to each other". Respect nature and respect each other, as we are all made from the same basic building blocks. Dude, party on man, party on that way :-D You are not that far from Scientology with that thinking. Just FYI to all those thinking "oh god, Paul is deep in the Scientology trap". I am not, I am looking into it and finding it very insteresting. I have not paid one cent to one shark for anything Scientology related regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape T
-
Michael Dunn wrote: Hubbard is dead, so I don't think he'll be writing anything new any time soon. Come then Mr. Dunn, tell us, or me, what you think about Scientology and Hubbards master work? None of this "pop-in, make OTT note, walk away from subject." :-D Michael Dunn wrote: Best score on the mini-putt game: 27 Sheeeee-it! Thats good. We, a co-worker and I dueling it out, have only got down to 31. You must have every hole imprented onto the back of your eyeball by now :-D regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
Paul Watson wrote: Come then Mr. Dunn, tell us, or me, what you think about Scientology and Hubbards master work? I echo Mr. Butler's sentiments posted earlier in the thread. Paul Watson wrote: None of this "pop-in, make OTT note, walk away from subject." I'm like Oz*, I pop into a scene, say one sentence, then fade back into the background. ;P * from Buffy --Mike-- Best score on the mini-putt game: 27 My really out-of-date homepage Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan and Jamie Salé.
-
STAY AWAY FROM SCIENTOLOGY ALL THEY WANT IS YOUR MONEY I had the unfortunate opportunity of being involved with their group in Poole in the UK. I was not very happy at the time and they gave me a questionare and sure enough i would benefit from their re-programming. Not a nice place at all, all they wanted was my money, I gave them over a £1000 nd they still wanted handouts ****************STAY AWAY*************** The Wudan Master
Li Mu Bai wrote: STAY AWAY FROM SCIENTOLOGY ALL THEY WANT IS YOUR MONEY Ok, this sounds harsh, but it is the truth: You did not take responsibility for your money or what you were investing it in. You gave it to some people saying they were Scientologists. No where in any of Scientology does it say "you must give us £1000 to be a better person." Nowhere. You got caught in a scam and I am sorry you did, I also am sorry that the people who scammed you gave you a bad reflection of Scientology. :-D Actually I just had a small revelation: I now know how frustrated Christians must get when us "non believers" scream that Christianity is bollocks because some dude from some Church used donations to buy himself a Beemer or Lambo. I realise now that that guy has nothing to do with Christianity or it's teachings and that linking him and the religion is rather closed minded and daft of me. Same here, linking those sharks who scammed you for £1000 to Scientology is the wrong thing to do. Just FYI to anyone interested you don't have to take Scientology tests, do their re-programming, stick yourself with e-meters or any of that to benefit from it. There is plenty of info on the web, free, and you can take it or leave it. In fact there is plenty of info straight from the horses mouth for free. Bottom line Li Mu Bai: Take responsibility for the fact that you got scammed regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
-
jan larsen wrote: It was a clash between a Theologist and one of the front persons in the Danish Scientology fraction. The Theologist read aloud some of the more funny parts of the "secret papers" that is kept private in the inner circles of Scientology (the small crowd of people who is controlling the minds and money of the outer circles), which claim that humans are some sort of lost souls from another planet (i think that Mars is the actual planet, but i do not recall). The guy from Scientology went all red in the face and claimed that the paper was NOT coming from Scientology, but at the same time he accused the Theologist's source of stealing from Scientology I had a pretty interesting discussion about this kind of thing with a smart guy the other day. Basically he took the example of Budhist monks. They sit all day, all life, chanting
omin 50 varients and most people look upon them as being highly spiritual. However Buddhas teachings and his "goal" for Buddhism has nothing to do with chanting om in 50 varients. In fact what the monks do is a polar affect of what Buddha wanted. He wanted them to take what he taught and to better their lives, simple as that. He did not want them wasting their lives chanting om, in 50 varients. This result of these monks is what is called a religious affect. The monks have become an affect of their chosen religion/belief/etc., instead of being an affect on their universe, as Buddha teaches. When that happens to the people you think are representative of a religion or belief you should realise that they are not what the religion or belief is about. The same with Islamic fundamentalists who kill in the name of Allah. Their religion does not actually preach it, yet they have twisted their belief in their minds so much that they believe what they are doing is what their religion teaches. It is pretty sad. Anyway, my point is that all these inner and outer circles in Scientology are not what Scientology is about. These people who "who is controlling the minds and money of the outer circles" have seen how they can use Scientology to their own benefit. They present themselves as representatives of Scientology, but ultimately they are not. Unfortunatley us humans are gullible and like to take the way "out", not through. So we fall into these traps quite easily. This is where the taking responsibility for your universe is key. You are responsible for not falling into the trap. You are responsible fI get your point and i totally agree, but you asked about Scientology which is the Church, and not about Dianetics which is the methods. I never read "Dianetics" for the same reason that i never read "I Ching", i am a very non-religious person which is actually quite depressive at times. It would e.g. be really nice at funerals to believe that there is a meaning of life and that perhaps one day you will meet your loved ones again. But my beliefs are very much anchored to the words of science, and when it comes to "Dianetics" and Scientology, then i just can't get myself to take a Sci-Fi writers non-scientific rantings for anything else than mumbo jumbo. I KNOW that Hubbard read Psychology, but besides giving him a better understanding of the human behaviour which could have given him tools for doing actual science, it also made him capable of exploiting human weakness. If i really HAD to choose a religion (that is, if somebody pointed a gun to my head and yelled: "CHOOSE or die!"), then i would probably choose Zen, it is SO obscure, mind boggling, and vague that you just HAVE to love it. Jan "It could have been worse, it could have been ME!"
-
peterchen wrote: the few paragraphs I read made me suspicous What did they say that made you suspicious? peterchen wrote: I wouldn't trust them my cat. Ok, am I missing a cat joke here? Are cats in jokes a German humour thing? regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
>> What did they say that made you suspicious? Has been a long time - ca 10 yrs, hard to remember details. It was my first encoutner with the "we have the truth, everyone else hasn't seen the light yet, Oooommmmmm" style. (Now I remeber, it was the "Dianetics" book) It didn't sound bad as such - but the intensity was a bit over the edge. (both of the book, and my friend telling me how *good* it is) >> am I missing a cat joke here No, I just wouldn't let them feed my cat (the pet tiger living with me) when I'd be away over the weekend or so. Already now she's looking at me and licking her lips.... scary.
-
Li Mu Bai wrote: STAY AWAY FROM SCIENTOLOGY ALL THEY WANT IS YOUR MONEY Ok, this sounds harsh, but it is the truth: You did not take responsibility for your money or what you were investing it in. You gave it to some people saying they were Scientologists. No where in any of Scientology does it say "you must give us £1000 to be a better person." Nowhere. You got caught in a scam and I am sorry you did, I also am sorry that the people who scammed you gave you a bad reflection of Scientology. :-D Actually I just had a small revelation: I now know how frustrated Christians must get when us "non believers" scream that Christianity is bollocks because some dude from some Church used donations to buy himself a Beemer or Lambo. I realise now that that guy has nothing to do with Christianity or it's teachings and that linking him and the religion is rather closed minded and daft of me. Same here, linking those sharks who scammed you for £1000 to Scientology is the wrong thing to do. Just FYI to anyone interested you don't have to take Scientology tests, do their re-programming, stick yourself with e-meters or any of that to benefit from it. There is plenty of info on the web, free, and you can take it or leave it. In fact there is plenty of info straight from the horses mouth for free. Bottom line Li Mu Bai: Take responsibility for the fact that you got scammed regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
-
Just curious but who here is into, knows anything about, or has an opinion on Scientology? To spark some memories Scientology was L Ron Hubbards creation and . Alternatively, has anyone read either of the following two books, if so, what did you think about them? The Fabric of Reality by David Deutsch and The PROPHET by Kahlil Gibran. On a lighter note I just read an article in the latest Time (the one with Bono on the cover saving the world, go Bono!) on page 38 about how MS and Intel are getting very much into mobile phones. The bit that had me in tears of mirth was "We want to help people create the iMac of cell phones" said by none other than the vice president of Microsoft's mobility group. :laugh: . MS striving to be like Apple... :laugh: ;) regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
first i really loath sf.. and so there is no other possibility for me to loath a religion which is based on sf.. (i loath all sf - like - religion - like thingies like the star wars cult and everything like that..) my personal problem i do have got with scientology is that they try to get people in trouble (x - drug addicts, kids with learning problems) by helping them, not saying that them that they are from scientology, and when the people "wake up" they are in the claws of them and have to pay much money to them.. i am not really religious, but all the catholic church wants from me are about 100$ per year and that's it.. not strings anything attached.. have a nice one bernhard
Sometimes I think the surest sign for intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is that none of them ever tried to contact us.
-
Paul Watson wrote: Come then Mr. Dunn, tell us, or me, what you think about Scientology and Hubbards master work? I echo Mr. Butler's sentiments posted earlier in the thread. Paul Watson wrote: None of this "pop-in, make OTT note, walk away from subject." I'm like Oz*, I pop into a scene, say one sentence, then fade back into the background. ;P * from Buffy --Mike-- Best score on the mini-putt game: 27 My really out-of-date homepage Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan and Jamie Salé.
Michael Dunn wrote: echo Mr. Butler's You gave me one hell of a shock there. The guy who got me onto this whole Scientology thinking over the last few days owns a company called Butlers. Pretty successful guy and when you said "Mr. Butler's" I thought "Mr. Dunn knows this guy?!?!?!" But I see you mean Butler of Micheal fame. :-D, freaky stuff Michael Dunn wrote: * from Buffy No wonder I don't know who Mr Oz is. (I thought Mr. Oz was Crocodile Dundee) *just trying to keep you talking so that maybe some genius will slip out and grace us ;)* regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
-
Just curious but who here is into, knows anything about, or has an opinion on Scientology? To spark some memories Scientology was L Ron Hubbards creation and . Alternatively, has anyone read either of the following two books, if so, what did you think about them? The Fabric of Reality by David Deutsch and The PROPHET by Kahlil Gibran. On a lighter note I just read an article in the latest Time (the one with Bono on the cover saving the world, go Bono!) on page 38 about how MS and Intel are getting very much into mobile phones. The bit that had me in tears of mirth was "We want to help people create the iMac of cell phones" said by none other than the vice president of Microsoft's mobility group. :laugh: . MS striving to be like Apple... :laugh: ;) regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
Scientology is a cult. :| A can't say it more clearly or conscisely than this: "I speak religion's message clear -- and I control you" 'Mr. Self-Destruct' by Nine Inch Nails I have a copy of 'The Prophet' by Kahlil Gibran; I think it's brilliant, but I don't think it has anything to do with scientology or organized religion in general. And as for MS striving to be like Apple -- did Apple not have a GUI before MS? (and they got it from PARC or someone else..) Viewing Apple, MS, Linux, et al as an US vs THEM scenario is uninformed and immature. It is not a black and white, right vs wrong battle. They all have good and bad points. "Why kill time, when you can kill yourself?" - Cabaret Voltaire
-
I get your point and i totally agree, but you asked about Scientology which is the Church, and not about Dianetics which is the methods. I never read "Dianetics" for the same reason that i never read "I Ching", i am a very non-religious person which is actually quite depressive at times. It would e.g. be really nice at funerals to believe that there is a meaning of life and that perhaps one day you will meet your loved ones again. But my beliefs are very much anchored to the words of science, and when it comes to "Dianetics" and Scientology, then i just can't get myself to take a Sci-Fi writers non-scientific rantings for anything else than mumbo jumbo. I KNOW that Hubbard read Psychology, but besides giving him a better understanding of the human behaviour which could have given him tools for doing actual science, it also made him capable of exploiting human weakness. If i really HAD to choose a religion (that is, if somebody pointed a gun to my head and yelled: "CHOOSE or die!"), then i would probably choose Zen, it is SO obscure, mind boggling, and vague that you just HAVE to love it. Jan "It could have been worse, it could have been ME!"
jan larsen wrote: but you asked about Scientology which is the Church, and not about Dianetics which is the methods :-O Yeah you are right, sorry, my mistake. I always assume when I talk about things that people will see I am not asking about the organisation around it, or preconcieved notions, or the hype or suppresive thoughts. I normally always mean the actual kernel of the subject. Bad assumption :) jan larsen wrote: But my beliefs are very much anchored to the words of science, and when it comes to "Dianetics" and Scientology, then i just can't get myself to take a Sci-Fi writers non-scientific rantings for anything else than mumbo jumbo. Well that is quite interesting. L Ron Hubbard was a respected nuclear scientist. He knew his quantum physics etc. and in recent years with Hawking's and others work a lot of scientists are realising that quantum physics and religion are coming to a crossing point. A lot of what Scientology is about is the multiverse, multiple histories, imaginary time etc. Basically, what quantum physics is describing our universe as being is scarily close to Scientology and more importantly Buddhism. I don't pretend to understand quantum physics but that really is a viewpoint a lot of scientists who do know their stuff are having. I always thought science and religion was dyamertrically opposed, but I am seeing that they aren't. jan larsen wrote: (that is, if somebody pointed a gun to my head and yelled: "CHOOSE or die!"), If that happened I would quickly choose a religion which ensured the guy pulling the trigger got fried by a bolt of lighting from the heaves in retribution for killing a "believer", or preferably one which fried him before he killed me ;P jan larsen wrote: then i would probably choose Zen, it is SO obscure, mind boggling, and vague that you just HAVE to love it. All I know about Zen is that my garden definitley is not Zen and that if I had a motorbike I would make sure I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Repair & Maintenance. So what is Zen? regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
-
jan larsen wrote: It was a clash between a Theologist and one of the front persons in the Danish Scientology fraction. The Theologist read aloud some of the more funny parts of the "secret papers" that is kept private in the inner circles of Scientology (the small crowd of people who is controlling the minds and money of the outer circles), which claim that humans are some sort of lost souls from another planet (i think that Mars is the actual planet, but i do not recall). The guy from Scientology went all red in the face and claimed that the paper was NOT coming from Scientology, but at the same time he accused the Theologist's source of stealing from Scientology I had a pretty interesting discussion about this kind of thing with a smart guy the other day. Basically he took the example of Budhist monks. They sit all day, all life, chanting
omin 50 varients and most people look upon them as being highly spiritual. However Buddhas teachings and his "goal" for Buddhism has nothing to do with chanting om in 50 varients. In fact what the monks do is a polar affect of what Buddha wanted. He wanted them to take what he taught and to better their lives, simple as that. He did not want them wasting their lives chanting om, in 50 varients. This result of these monks is what is called a religious affect. The monks have become an affect of their chosen religion/belief/etc., instead of being an affect on their universe, as Buddha teaches. When that happens to the people you think are representative of a religion or belief you should realise that they are not what the religion or belief is about. The same with Islamic fundamentalists who kill in the name of Allah. Their religion does not actually preach it, yet they have twisted their belief in their minds so much that they believe what they are doing is what their religion teaches. It is pretty sad. Anyway, my point is that all these inner and outer circles in Scientology are not what Scientology is about. These people who "who is controlling the minds and money of the outer circles" have seen how they can use Scientology to their own benefit. They present themselves as representatives of Scientology, but ultimately they are not. Unfortunatley us humans are gullible and like to take the way "out", not through. So we fall into these traps quite easily. This is where the taking responsibility for your universe is key. You are responsible for not falling into the trap. You are responsible fYou are a fool Paul Watson. ;) As every sane and elightened individual on Earth knows, all goods things that happen to me and those around me happened because of me, all bads things must of been caused by something or someone else. ;P Michael Martin Australia mjm68@tpg.com.au "Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace" - Victor Stone
-
first i really loath sf.. and so there is no other possibility for me to loath a religion which is based on sf.. (i loath all sf - like - religion - like thingies like the star wars cult and everything like that..) my personal problem i do have got with scientology is that they try to get people in trouble (x - drug addicts, kids with learning problems) by helping them, not saying that them that they are from scientology, and when the people "wake up" they are in the claws of them and have to pay much money to them.. i am not really religious, but all the catholic church wants from me are about 100$ per year and that's it.. not strings anything attached.. have a nice one bernhard
Sometimes I think the surest sign for intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is that none of them ever tried to contact us.
Bernhard wrote: my personal problem i do have got with scientology is that they try to get people in trouble (x - drug addicts, kids with learning problems) by helping them, not saying that them that they are from scientology, and when the people "wake up" they are in the claws of them and have to pay much money to them.. Ugh that just sucks. I see this as a huge problem for any religion or belief. You get these sharks who prey on the gullible or weak by using the religions message, then they nail you. Meanwhile the religion is toddling along doing nothing wrong, yet we all think it itself is the bad thing, not the manipulative bastards who corrupt the face of the religion. One interesting point is that Scientology does not help those most in need. In fact it says that the able should help the able. Make the able more able. I think, because I am still new at all this, that L Ron Hubbard firmly believed that we should not be "wasting" our resources on the poor, the disabled, the addicted but rather we should be uplifting the uplifted even more. The idea was that by uplifting the uplifted you uplifted the general "environment" and this helps the downtrodden by making them more able indirectly. Having lived in Africa and seen billions being pumped into the hands of the poor I have to agree that helping the able is a better way to help the poor. i.e. Don't give the poor Africans the money, give it to those who are able to use the money to create more and use it wisely. The poor just go directly and buy food, the money does not build on it's own foundations, it just gets used. Bernhard wrote: first i really loath sf I will pray for you ;) I love sci-fi. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
-
jan larsen wrote: but you asked about Scientology which is the Church, and not about Dianetics which is the methods :-O Yeah you are right, sorry, my mistake. I always assume when I talk about things that people will see I am not asking about the organisation around it, or preconcieved notions, or the hype or suppresive thoughts. I normally always mean the actual kernel of the subject. Bad assumption :) jan larsen wrote: But my beliefs are very much anchored to the words of science, and when it comes to "Dianetics" and Scientology, then i just can't get myself to take a Sci-Fi writers non-scientific rantings for anything else than mumbo jumbo. Well that is quite interesting. L Ron Hubbard was a respected nuclear scientist. He knew his quantum physics etc. and in recent years with Hawking's and others work a lot of scientists are realising that quantum physics and religion are coming to a crossing point. A lot of what Scientology is about is the multiverse, multiple histories, imaginary time etc. Basically, what quantum physics is describing our universe as being is scarily close to Scientology and more importantly Buddhism. I don't pretend to understand quantum physics but that really is a viewpoint a lot of scientists who do know their stuff are having. I always thought science and religion was dyamertrically opposed, but I am seeing that they aren't. jan larsen wrote: (that is, if somebody pointed a gun to my head and yelled: "CHOOSE or die!"), If that happened I would quickly choose a religion which ensured the guy pulling the trigger got fried by a bolt of lighting from the heaves in retribution for killing a "believer", or preferably one which fried him before he killed me ;P jan larsen wrote: then i would probably choose Zen, it is SO obscure, mind boggling, and vague that you just HAVE to love it. All I know about Zen is that my garden definitley is not Zen and that if I had a motorbike I would make sure I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Repair & Maintenance. So what is Zen? regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
Paul Watson wrote: All I know about Zen is that my garden definitley is not Zen and that if I had a motorbike I would make sure I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Repair & Maintenance. Funnily enough, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance doesn't really contain much about motorcycle maintenance. Doesn't have much about Zen in it either... Kevin
-
Michael P Butler wrote: My own problems with Scientology come from some of those dubious legal practises that I've read about This is a problem I have with a lot of intelligent people, myself included. We hear about some or other quite amazing thing and think "sounds cool, lets investigate." We then run into the mob surrounding the thing. Often this puts us off straight away and we link that because the mob is interested and into it, that whatever it is, is bollocks. We smarties have a big problem with organised anything, tell me I am wrong. We don't like being told what to do, or being force fed a religion. We like to be in control, have our way and not be brainwashed. I totally agree and that is a good thing, a good thing that we are not sheep. However it seems to sometimes blind us to good things. Another thing is that as with anything successful there are sharks circling it, biting off bits of it and using those bits to their own end. It seems as though Scientology has been a big victim of that. While Scientology itself is not bad, the people who say they are lead Scientologists (an oxymoron really as Scientology is a one person, one universe type of thing) use it's success to get what they want. Unfortunatley the mob often just glosses over that, clamouring to pay more money to the sharks, while us smarties see the sharks and label both the sharks and the religion as bad. It kind of reminds me of Linux. I see all these idiots surrounding it, using it, manipulating it and it makes it harder for Linux to win me over. I know Linux is not really about beating MS, I know that the daft script kiddies and Linuz zealots do not represent what Linux is about, but I also know that if I get involved with Linux other smarties will look down on me with disdain for "having fallen into such a stupid trap." Michael P Butler wrote: I'm probably more of a Bill and Ted kind of person, "Be excellent to each other". Respect nature and respect each other, as we are all made from the same basic building blocks. Dude, party on man, party on that way :-D You are not that far from Scientology with that thinking. Just FYI to all those thinking "oh god, Paul is deep in the Scientology trap". I am not, I am looking into it and finding it very insteresting. I have not paid one cent to one shark for anything Scientology related regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape T
Paul Watson wrote: You are not that far from Scientology with that thinking. The difference is that I have come to these beliefs by my own experience and thinking. I don't need no organised religion to say I am a Scientologist, I am a Christian, I am a Jedi or I am a Muslim. I am Michael and that is all that matters to me. All religions contain the same basic concepts in the 'Be excellent to each other' message. It is just that these 'religions' have been subverted throughout history by people for there own ends. The Dianetics concept at the heart of scientology is interesting, it's just the rest of the crap that comes within the organised religion that bothers me. I'm lucky, I can think for myself but not all people are that lucky. Paul Watson wrote: Just FYI to all those thinking "oh god, Paul is deep in the Scientology trap". I am not, I am looking into it and finding it very insteresting. I have not paid one cent to one shark for anything Scientology related It's okay, you survived the VB trap - you should be able to beat the Scientology brain-washing. Even if you don't, I'm sure plenty of people will volunteer to beat it out of you :-) Michael :-)
-
jan larsen wrote: but you asked about Scientology which is the Church, and not about Dianetics which is the methods :-O Yeah you are right, sorry, my mistake. I always assume when I talk about things that people will see I am not asking about the organisation around it, or preconcieved notions, or the hype or suppresive thoughts. I normally always mean the actual kernel of the subject. Bad assumption :) jan larsen wrote: But my beliefs are very much anchored to the words of science, and when it comes to "Dianetics" and Scientology, then i just can't get myself to take a Sci-Fi writers non-scientific rantings for anything else than mumbo jumbo. Well that is quite interesting. L Ron Hubbard was a respected nuclear scientist. He knew his quantum physics etc. and in recent years with Hawking's and others work a lot of scientists are realising that quantum physics and religion are coming to a crossing point. A lot of what Scientology is about is the multiverse, multiple histories, imaginary time etc. Basically, what quantum physics is describing our universe as being is scarily close to Scientology and more importantly Buddhism. I don't pretend to understand quantum physics but that really is a viewpoint a lot of scientists who do know their stuff are having. I always thought science and religion was dyamertrically opposed, but I am seeing that they aren't. jan larsen wrote: (that is, if somebody pointed a gun to my head and yelled: "CHOOSE or die!"), If that happened I would quickly choose a religion which ensured the guy pulling the trigger got fried by a bolt of lighting from the heaves in retribution for killing a "believer", or preferably one which fried him before he killed me ;P jan larsen wrote: then i would probably choose Zen, it is SO obscure, mind boggling, and vague that you just HAVE to love it. All I know about Zen is that my garden definitley is not Zen and that if I had a motorbike I would make sure I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Repair & Maintenance. So what is Zen? regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
Paul Watson wrote: So what is Zen? The main computer on the Liberator in Blakes 7 :-) Michael :-)
-
Scientology is a cult. :| A can't say it more clearly or conscisely than this: "I speak religion's message clear -- and I control you" 'Mr. Self-Destruct' by Nine Inch Nails I have a copy of 'The Prophet' by Kahlil Gibran; I think it's brilliant, but I don't think it has anything to do with scientology or organized religion in general. And as for MS striving to be like Apple -- did Apple not have a GUI before MS? (and they got it from PARC or someone else..) Viewing Apple, MS, Linux, et al as an US vs THEM scenario is uninformed and immature. It is not a black and white, right vs wrong battle. They all have good and bad points. "Why kill time, when you can kill yourself?" - Cabaret Voltaire
Daniel Ferguson wrote: A can't say it more clearly or conscisely than this: "I speak religion's message clear -- and I control you" 'Mr. Self-Destruct' by Nine Inch Nails Now there is someone we all should really be listening to. Mr. Self-destruct... X| Daniel Ferguson wrote: I have a copy of 'The Prophet' by Kahlil Gibran; I think it's brilliant, but I don't think it has anything to do with scientology or organized religion in general. I never said they were related, I am just curious as I have been recommended the book by the same guy who thinks Scientology has a lot of good stuff in it. Daniel Ferguson wrote: And as for MS striving to be like Apple -- did Apple not have a GUI before MS? (and they got it from PARC or someone else..) Viewing Apple, MS, Linux, et al as an US vs THEM scenario is uninformed and immature. It is not a black and white, right vs wrong battle. They all have good and bad points. I am sure I said "on a lighter note" when I posted that about MS and Apple. Don't take it so seriously, I just thought it was a hilarious statement from an MS employee. MS employees are reknowned for, like Sun employees, not saying anything good about "the other camp." I am sure Bill will have a private chat with that vice president. :-D Daniel Ferguson wrote: "Why kill time, when you can kill yourself?" - Cabaret Voltaire Thats funny. Scientology has quite a bit about supressive personalities who end up killing themselves and how they take things down around with them. Your signature is pretty much spot on with what it says about the matter. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
-
Just curious but who here is into, knows anything about, or has an opinion on Scientology? To spark some memories Scientology was L Ron Hubbards creation and . Alternatively, has anyone read either of the following two books, if so, what did you think about them? The Fabric of Reality by David Deutsch and The PROPHET by Kahlil Gibran. On a lighter note I just read an article in the latest Time (the one with Bono on the cover saving the world, go Bono!) on page 38 about how MS and Intel are getting very much into mobile phones. The bit that had me in tears of mirth was "We want to help people create the iMac of cell phones" said by none other than the vice president of Microsoft's mobility group. :laugh: . MS striving to be like Apple... :laugh: ;) regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "The greatest thing you will ever learn is to love, and be loved in return" - Moulin Rouge Sonork ID: 100.9903 Stormfront
L. Ron Hubbard quote: "Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion" Scientology is second only to christianity/islam in the mind-control department. Stay as far away from these people as possible. It was started deliberately to make money by L. Ron Hubbard after he came up with the idea in a science fiction story. The 'secrets' of this 'religion', which you only find out years after you have poured your life savings into the organisation, are that the Earth is haunted by the lost souls of the 'Xemu' people who were excess to the requirements of some alien empire and were all executed by being drugged and left to burn at the foot of one of Earths active volcanoes. The problems of mankind are, supposedly, the result of us being haunted by these lost souls and the process of 'dyanetics' is the exorcism of them from us (Getting 'Clear'). There are many different levels of being clear - they seem to add on to them once too many people reach the last level. Shortly before L. Ron died, his wife (and several others) were arrested in connection with a plot to steal documents and other things from the federal government in order to inhibit the ongoing IRS investigation into Scientology. Criminal convictions were obtained for L. Ron's wife and others, but L. Ron himself escaped the net of "justice." Eventually, Scientology and the government entered into a settlement which provided that Scientology could keep its status as a church (and the associated tax exemption privilege), pay the government a bunch of money, and the government would back off until at least January 1, 2000. Well, its 2 years past the deadline now, and if there is any good to come out of the incoming religious reich, it is that they will have absolutely no reason to keep their hands off of Scientology. There is no good reason why the USA can't do what the Germans and French have done: outlaw this cult! Oh, proof. Right. *digs through the 'cults and religion' folder of favorites* http://www.xenu.net/ http://www.sky.net/~sloth/sci/Harlan.Ellison http://home.kvalito.no/~xenu/archive/books/bfm/bfmconte.htm http://www.scientology-lies.com/ // Rock
-
Paul Watson wrote: You are not that far from Scientology with that thinking. The difference is that I have come to these beliefs by my own experience and thinking. I don't need no organised religion to say I am a Scientologist, I am a Christian, I am a Jedi or I am a Muslim. I am Michael and that is all that matters to me. All religions contain the same basic concepts in the 'Be excellent to each other' message. It is just that these 'religions' have been subverted throughout history by people for there own ends. The Dianetics concept at the heart of scientology is interesting, it's just the rest of the crap that comes within the organised religion that bothers me. I'm lucky, I can think for myself but not all people are that lucky. Paul Watson wrote: Just FYI to all those thinking "oh god, Paul is deep in the Scientology trap". I am not, I am looking into it and finding it very insteresting. I have not paid one cent to one shark for anything Scientology related It's okay, you survived the VB trap - you should be able to beat the Scientology brain-washing. Even if you don't, I'm sure plenty of people will volunteer to beat it out of you :-) Michael :-)
Michael P Butler wrote: The Dianetics concept at the heart of scientology is interesting, it's just the rest of the crap that comes within the organised religion that bothers me. Hear! Hear! That is exactly my reaction to organised religion. All the mob mentality, pontification, organisations, non-profit, do-this-do-that, harass-the-living-hell-out-of-anyone-who-misses-one-meeting, I-will-pray-for-your-soul-Paul-Watson cooky-baking-child-making-nose-in-my-business-sticking-goody-two-shoes piss me off. All of that makes me hate the thing that they say they represent. Michael P Butler wrote: The difference is that I have come to these beliefs by my own experience and thinking. I don't need no organised religion to say I am a Scientologist, I am a Christian, I am a Jedi or I am a Muslim. I am Michael Well that is the good thing from my perspective too. I have thought a lot of these things long before someone told me there was a religion on it. So when you do find something, the methodology and core beliefs of Scientology, that fits quite well with what you believe it does something to you. Even you cannot admit surely that the "hey, we think and believe alike" event has no affect on you. Michael P Butler wrote: It is just that these 'religions' have been subverted throughout history by people for there own ends. Well, this is why I am asking you smart and often wise people here on CP about Scientology. I don't want to know that some daft bugger used Scientology to scam some people, I couldn't care less. I know I don't have to pay anyone or wear a white robe to be a better person. I know I don't have to attend church or be seen doing things. What I wan't to know is: The core beliefs and the methodology of Scientology, is it valid, is it real, what do you think about it, is it a good way or has it some blinding flaw which makes it unreal. What can a young person such as my self learn from it so that I can carry on stearing my own course but without having to reinvent the wheel on every thought. I don't want to be re-programmed or shove an e-meter up my arse. I want to know about the universe and my part in it. If someone says "oh, in reality you are a rock" I will just laugh and carry on with my own thinking and life. As you say, think for yourself. But there have been some smart people before us whose thoughts we can use to better our thoughts. Otherwise I and you have to start at rock botto