Mike Rinder's Blog
Something Can Be Done About It
June 7, 2019 By Mike Rinder 72 Comments
Foolproof says “Scientific proof” is better known in Scientology as something observable, like people getting better and more able, not subjected to vested interests whims and paid-for laboratories. But you wouldn’t agree even if something was obvious, and don’t pretend you would.”
Sooo there’s NO scientific proof then???🤔
Also I would and HAVE agreed with things when I’ve been proven wrong about an opinion I’ve had. Also admit when I’m wrong which I’ve discovered $camatologists can’t and won’t do even if the proof is OBVIOUS.
It’s funny you accuse people of being close minded and “not looking into their own minds” when that’s EXACTLY how $camatologists act towards others…
Foolproof your silence is deafening.
Another question for you Foolproof.
Either the “tech” worked and Hubblard was defrauding the government by receiving Disability payments when there was nothing wrong with him…
OR the “tech” doesn’t/never did work and he/Miscravige leprechaun did/are defrauding their parisheners…
Which is it?
Either way they’re both FRAUDS!
jere lull (38years recovering) says
FOOLproof asked what Hubbard was wrong about….
How ’bout just about EVERYTHING he said? After 40 years of recovery, I can’t think of ONE thing he said that was actually true and correctly described the real world or its inhabitants. AND I found MANY instances where acting like a scientologist was the exact wrong thing to do.
Dead Men Tell No Tales Bill Straass says
I was on the “FP” committee at FSO in the early 80,s but I am not qualified to be on the FP committee here. Sorry.
Kat LaRue says
Everything has a price in Scientology. They disgust me.
I am sure Scientology will heed your words and, like Jesuit George, pay penance by wearing a hair shirt for weeks. Surely?
I preferred your former photo Kat, where you were looking sideways in a crafty manner, rather than this new one of looking like a determined anti-cultist (for the TV slot you are angling for?) Come on Mike – give her a chance on A-E program – you can try this new angle for Kat: “I have no experience in Scientology and haven’t got a clue what’s it about but I think it should be banned” – will go down a treat!
FOOLproof added nothing other than a sophomoric attempt to insult Kat, which went over like a lead balloon, since, among other things, it was unconnected to the real world we can see plainly. Of COURSE, he had nothing pithy to say about the topic at hand. He can’t be bothered to have a REAL conversation about ISSUES. He(?) is too much of a cultie to intelligently converse, it seems. And yes, I’m walking a fine line near ad hominem, myself. Let’s see if FOOL can be baited into a conversation….
Foolproof never “converses.” He attacks, snipes or ridicules, but he has always shown himself to be unable to converse, in the sense of being able to allow a different point of view while supporting your own – without insulting anyone.
I always find it amazing that I am accused of this, which is somewhat true, but compared to just about every comment and every story posted here, is like a comparison of a trolling elephant to a trolling ant. It seems to escape you that this whole blog and 99% of comments is composed of trolling.
And as for me living in an unreal world which I am also accused of sporadically and in these particular comments, the above fact (and many others) can only lead me to believe that most here can’t see the end of their noses beyond their own little foggy universes of spite and revenge.
I really dont think he has anything to say. He can only attack and run.
It seems to escape you that that is all that you are doing. What have you stated that has not been stated before?
your inability to stick around and actually answer questions that you dont want to answer (because it would force you to admit Hubbard was wrong) is what I was referring to. I have always tried to stick around to answer your insults until they have degenerated int a pointless waste of time because you dont answer the actual question.
Er, what exactly was Hubbard “wrong” about? (This will be interesting!)
Just about everything….It would take much less time to attempt to come up with something he got correct. The man was a buffoon
FBI please investigate Scientology says
You can get on United States Federal Bankruptcy courts and look up everything about bankruptcies filed and granted for all Scientologists
And they still keep donating
And there is no transparency from Scientology
We should gather the data and turn it in to the FBI, IRS, AG of each state and all government officials
To get Scientology’s religious status reduced to pay taxes and those Scienfoolerists who file bk need to pay all creditors back with refunds of their extorted donations
Why aren’t these US entities investigating this? Why do they not do their jobs? They all make top dollar,
File complaints people!
We must do something about it!
FBI, because it isn’t a crime for anyplace to accept money from people who are bankrupt. That’s why there is no investigation over it.
Nice to see you again fool. As usual you add deep insight into any subject you choose. I apologize that you don’t like my gravatar- I’ve explained that the change was inadvertent. But as usual you only wish to degrade and ridicule people instead of having any meaningful discourse on any subject. Grow up.
“Meaningful discourse” – and especially with you Kat? I would be pleased to do so but I have never or rarely seen it here, from you or others. Let’s take just 1 simple example – the false idea that Scientology was advocating that their babies are only fed on the Barley Formula. When I pointed out – by simply referring to the Scientology website – that it can be used as a supplement and that Hubbard was promoting breast feeding as the best way, way back in 1952, it all goes quiet and commenters move on to some other attack theme. Another example was the idea that “wogs” was used as a racial slur in Scientology when it never was and as I pointed out. Another (daft) example was that the “e-meter only works on sweat”.
This idea (that I am not interested in a discourse) of course is simply another way of trying to negate what I mention and belittle me. You and most others here are not interested in any sort of discourse, but then of course you accuse me of what you and others are doing in bucketfuls. I at least try to be fair on most things.
Mike Rinder says
Your comments speak for themselves. No need to try to explain yourself.
The fact that you don’t see it doesn’t surprise me as your capacity for insight into how you appear to others is very damaged-much like many still in OSA members. Take, for example, the smear campaigns that the cult has repeatedly posted on social media. These are easily disproved by a simple goggle search, and then they look like raving idiots and lose even more potential members. Like them, you are unable to even consider that Hubbard was wrong, thus making you unable to converse on ANY topic effectively. All I have to say is that Hubbard was an idiot and you start to froth at the mouth. You give away your power when you get mad. You give it to the person who is controlling your anger and emotions.
That being said, I am not familiar with Barley formula, but if the only source for information comes from Hubbard, I would be immediately skeptical due to the source of the “research” and would need to look into it on a deeper level (another of your problems- Hubbard is NOT a reliable source for ANY information). I am also not familiar with your sweat/E-meter debate.
I AM familiar with the WOG debate as I was heavily involved. Just reading Hubbard’s words should show you that it was being used in a derogatory way. Even without pulling Hubbard’s re-defined word-Salad into the mix, it’s is, by his own definition, derogatory, as Hubbard’s ego made him feel better and more intelligent (he wasn’t) than any other person on the planet, and his little cult army- in believing he was a Demi-god- was better than everyone who questioned him- ergo- derogatory on its face. I’m sure you will believe I am wrong, and come back with a derogatory comment of your own.
Before you do, Answer me one question. Why is it SO important to you that no one think WOG is being used in a derogatory manner in Scientology? Why get so worked up over that point? The answer- if you are 100% truthful to yourself may go a long way to freeing you.
Either you are being obtuse or very clever. The original argument from Mike and others was that “wog” was used in Scientology as a RACIST slur and you have done exactly what Mike did last time and changed the argument when it was lost. I pointed out and eventually dragged out of Mike that “wog” was never used as a RACIST slur in Scientology, anyone who has been involved in Scientology knows that for a fact.
Mike then, in his annoyance no doubt that someone had challenged his or someone else’s false premise, came up with the lame idea that the use of the word “wog” was even worse than being racist in that it was being used derogatorily which again is absolute nonsense – the fact that it would be considered “worse than racism” that is. It was a MILDLY derogatory term in Scientology at about the same level as the fans of one football or baseball team would regard the fans of another team, if not even far less than that. Now in these days of political correctness being “derogatory” (gasp, swoon) is probably considered as the most heinous crime since Attila the Hun and so of course you think I will nay-say it. No, I will just state the truth of the matter: firstly the word “wog” was never used as a “racist” slur in Scientology and secondly it was a mildly derogatory term and thirdly, if being derogatory is considered the crime of the century, then you and nearly every other commenter here should be locked up for the next 500 years.
Lastly, as a “forensic psychologist”, your inept conclusion (being derogatory here – haha!) that I am an “OSA member” shows how inept your training must have been and explains why there are so many murderers running about free! There – have some “derogatoriness” – you are dishing it out right left and centre so you can’t complain. But don’t swoon eh?
So try and twist that now to suit your agenda – I am sure you will attempt to, but realize that even ex-Scientologists and even some “wogs”, will be able to discern either your inability to duplicate or your not-so-hidden agenda.
Why do you have to go on and on and misstate things that are easily disproven to try to always be “right”? Scientology claims they can handle that compulsion but it seems it hasn’t worked on you.
To use your terminology, “firstly”, you show your own narcissism in misreading the comment. I never even implied you were in OSA. Secondly, wog was and is used both as a derogatory comment and it is a racist slur by definition. Hubbard even defines it that way when he pinpointed a group: “worthy oriental gentleman”. Again- “oriental in itself is derogatory, and by singling out a group for a derogatory comment (and yes, he meant it that way- just read his comments about his take on bathing habits and you are left with NO doubt that it was derogatory and racist in the most disgusting way). Finally (or “lastly”) you seem to be under some sort of mistaken idea that you have proven something- you have yet to prove that you have an IQ above 5, much less any salient point that anyone can find.
Let the frothing of the mouth begin….
FP, isn’t “I have no experience [with Psychiatry] and haven’t got a clue what’s it about but I think it should be banned” a description of the Hubbardian/Scientological view? So what makes one variation so wrong, and the other justifiable?
People like Kat have at least has made some effort to learn, and come to understand, relatively more about Scientology, than scientologists ever do about psychiatry – and in her case she actually has some real, professional training. I know you like to deride people who have actually pursued professional or scientific training; it’s sadly similar to the way that lazy and failed people try to cut down those who have succeeded through dint of hard work.
Yes, the sum total of that “education” leads her to the conclusion that electro-shock therapy is beneficial and that the mind is the brain and the soul doesn’t exist. No doubt if she had been born earlier she would have stated the same about lobotomies and leucotomies. “Training”? I spit! Don’t juxtapose psychiatry and psychology with “science” – it is mumbo-jumbo.
Do you think scientology is science?
Deb Edgerton says
People like Stan and Ted are stuck in Scientology’s brainwashing of “the state of being Winners”. Which only makes them penniless losers.
But what’s up with the canine relief with the seemingly fist for paws clutching people type figures that is just behind Laurent’s shoulder in the Prosperity poster?
Xenu's Son says
Nice touch on the Fundamentals of thoughts R6 god judge.
Gus Cox says
Using the R6 God as the judge – nice touch!
You have successfully completed the Stupidity Rundown when you leave scamology for good.
Ms. B. Haven says
Reminds me of something a co-worker used to say all the time.
“You can make something foolproof, but you can’t make it idiot proof.” Had he been reading this blog for any length of time he would have known it was actually the other way around. “You can make something idiot proof but you can’t make it foolproof.”
Haha! how erudite! He should found an applied religious philosophy! Such insights! Such workability! Whoever your co-worker is or was he should write some books on this.
Does Mike say to you “drop a mention of Foolproof in your comments as my stats are down!”, or was it something I said sometime? Or both?
FP – We are all just stats on a blog, our true place in the universe. Rejoice! Most of the criticism is of the current cherch. Trying to promote the “Tech” on this blog is like talking God on an atheist blog. Conversion unlikely.
Well Richard, False Data Stripping, which I somewhat engage in here, is good for the soul, even the souls on here! It came out in the early 1980s so maybe you didn’t receive any before you left?
As to converting anyone to the Tech, most of the commenters on here have excluded themselves from such as the one thing they cannot do is look into their own minds. Perfect example is the quote that “engrams don’t exist” let alone overts, withholds etc. So no I am not that daft to proselytize here – just correcting some false data.
Where’s the SCIENTIFIC PROOF that “engrams, overts and withholds etc” exist???
Oh and if you’re trying to be Santa Foolproof he says HOHOHO! 😉
Haha! Watch Marty Rathbun’s pinch test on Jon Sweeney – perfect example of a missed withhold.
“Scientific proof” is better known in Scientology as something observable, like people getting better and more able, not subjected to vested interests whims and paid-for laboratories. But you wouldn’t agree even if something was obvious, and don’t pretend you would.
“You fool, of course that’s in DMSMH and that’s proof enough for me!!!!!111!!!!eleven!!!111!!!”
Foolproof – I left in1982 and didn’t come across False Data Stripping. The term seems self explanatory, examining false information (data) upon which one is operating to possible benefit.
Discussing how, if or why any of the numerous Scientology procedures work on a blog is a thing of the past, particularly on a daily blog which is all that is left. I suppose it remains a topic of conversation in Indie groups.
I stay away from speculation on people’s motivation. If False Data Stripping on an Anti Scientology blog is “good for your soul” enjoy yourself! My facetious comment above was mostly a suggestion to lighten up a bit. 🙂
Foolproof said:”Does Mike say to you “drop a mention of Foolproof in your comments as my stats are down!”, or was it something I said sometime? Or both?”
Mike throws up interesting thought-pieces for us to discuss. My comments on your failure to discuss the TOPICS are solely because I like bull bating you back; it’s almost TOO easy, but gives me a measure of satisfaction in my golden years.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.
Some are PROUDLY ignorant….
Wynski offered up:
“You have successfully completed the Stupidity Rundown when you leave scamology for good.”
I think the name needs a little work, but I love the sentiment. It’s not so much “stupidity” as it is gullibility)which is derived from “gull”,not the other way around, as stated by someone yesterday, IIRC.
Agreed Jere. But it is only gullibility when you are first recruited. After a certain amount of exposure, stupid (lack of intelligence) comes into play.
I mean how many moldy hot dogs are you going to buy and eat from the street vendor before you stop believing his sign that says FRESH food?
I use one of their terms – Freedom Release. A lot of people, myself included, blow, but deep down kind of know you’ll have to go back for your eternity’s sake. The state of true Freedom Release is when you achieve 100% certainty that you will never go back.
Another Church Leader Arrested for Child Sexual Abuse
And he really did have a million followers.
Another way of disagreeing with the physical universe is to jump out of a top story window.
This would not end well either.
Ammo Alamo says
His affect would be flat. Very flat.
I Yawnalot says
I’ve seen that bearded Dude on a book cover haven’t I? Good one RB.
Old Surfer Dude says
Yes. Yes you have. And so have I.
My copy went into the trash some time ago. What did you do with yours?
I looked up the words I didn’t understand.
Yeah… I did, but then what? I stopped believing in something that doesn’t work after I realized it doesn’t work. Get out of the sand pit Fool, it’s unbecoming at your age.
In the first panel Stan tells Ted:
“You should know by now that if you Play the Game of Life by Physical Universe rules, you’re only gonna get Physical Universe results”.
As every ex-cultie knows, this is a common refrain from any reg or recruiter. One of my early red flag warnings was:
How come it doesn’t work the other way? Why would scientology need money since they don’t play by physical universe rules?
Answer: It’s not a religion or applied religious philosophy that is not playing by physical universe rules. It’s a con. In scientology it’s all about the money and only about the money.
James Rosso says
Ms. B. Haven wrote: “Why would scientology need money since they don’t play by physical universe rules?”
a.k.a: “Why does God need a starship?”
Also: Classic Carlin: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPOfurmrjxo&t=45s)
It was about when i was 12 years old that i realized that organized religion was just about perpetuating the organization.
“…when I realized that organized religion was just about perpetuating the organization.”
Well said, James Rosso!
And well done too on figuring this out at such a tender age!
Thanks for the video link JR. Carlin pretty much sums it up with his trademark humor and irrefutable logic.
Carlin was so good. I still can’t believe he’s gone. I heard, or read, that he got much of his inspiration from 50’s comedic genius Lenny Bruce. He’s the one who said, “If Jesus had been killed 20 years ago, Catholic school children would be wearing little electric chairs around their necks instead of crosses”. Hilarious!
Maybe it’s easier accept that the universe is the way it is just because it is and everything is already alright, already.
Science estimates the universe will last about another one trillion years. Waiting for it to change might be a long wait. Trying to change it with scientology or religion has resulted insolvency for many people.
“It is what it is” could be fatalism or kensho depending on point of view or individual subjective experience.
Fatalism 1) the acceptance of all things and events as inevitable: submission to fate
2) philosophy. the doctrine that all events are subject to fate or inevitable predetermination
Kensho – it is usually translated as seeing one’s true nature, that is the Buddha nature. It’s an initial insight and not full Buddhahood. Kensho is often used interchangeably with satori
My desktop computer is being serviced so I’m practicing typing on a tablet. I’m totally low tech. General topic – disagreeing with the physical universe – haha
Thanks for the replies everyone, it’s always good to hear one’s thoughts be appreciated.
But i had to jump on this:
“Science estimates the universe will last about another one trillion years.”
Unless i’ve missed something recent, this way waay waaaaaay understates what science expects to happen, given what we know for now. Phil Plait’s book “Death from the Skies!” has a nice summary in the last chapter titled “The end of everything.”
The universe is currently 13.7 billion years old, or approximately 10^10 (10,000,000,000) years old (exponential notation). Scientists estimate stars will continue to form and burn for trillions more years, but by about 10^15 years (100,000,000,000,000, or 100 trillion years) the last star will have run out of material to fuse and the universe will be dark from this point on. With occasional re-ignitions of stellar fusion as cold dark masses collide and combine to the point that they can fuse again. For a while.
Even normal matter can decay into its constituent subatomic particles over enough time, and the cold, dark dead matter will decay. By about 10^40 years, there won’t even be any protons left. Just a thin soup of electron, neutrinos and any other particles that don’t decay. And black holes.
But black holes can die too. They can evaporate via Hawking radiation. The smaller they are, the faster they go, but the larger they are, the slower they go and the longer it takes. And there are some VERY large black holes out there. But by about 10^92 years, even the biggest should have evaporated away. There is nothing left but a thin slurry of electrons, photons and other subatomic particles that can go for thousands of millenia before approaching one another to possibly interact.
This is what scientists mean when they talk about the ‘heat death’ of the universe.
Sorry if i brought anyone down with that, but LRH was notorious for talking confidently about things he knew nothing about. I’d hate anyone to accuse us of that too!
James Rosso – It will be exciting to watch the ‘heat death’ of the universe occur. (joke)
In this week’s Thursday Funnies a passage from Elron’s 1965 Keeping Scientology Working policy letter was in one of the funnies. He writes, “The whole organized future of this planet, every man, woman child on it, and your own destiny for the next ENDLESS TRILLIONS of years depends on what you do here and now with and in Scientology.” caps mine
So in his usual grandiose style he covers himself regarding “the end of the universe” with a generality.
Current observation says the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate so the end might occur”a bit” sooner. 🙂
Dark matter, dark energy and other yet unknown factors might enter the equation as to how long the universe will last. If the expansion of the universe goes into a geometric progression this universe might be toast in less than a trillion years. Enjoy your lifetimes while you still have them.
“It’s a con.” Conology. Just give us your money and shut the fuck up.
“Just give us your money and shut the fuck up.”
Lmao this should be their motto. At least they’d get point for honesty, if nothing else.
Edit button has gone AWOL apparently. Lol
“Disagreeing with the physical universe is not a legal reason to declare bankruptcy.”
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *