Added: 4 years ago
From: Aleteuk
Views: 7,433,914
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (110,478)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I used to be a scientoligist but then I took logic to the head.

  • Erm there's one thing I don't understand about this...everything he said!?!

  • He's another fanatic - like all the Christian fundamentalists, Muslim fundamentalists etc

    They have 100% conviction that they are right. Unfortunately they can't seem to see that LRH used Dianetics as a way to boost his bank balance, buy luxury homes and a yacht and crew it with his hot lil concubines.

    Great Scam LRH wherever you are. ;o)

  • i dont know whether to laugh or to cry...

  • @VIncpiro

    I was thinking the same thing. What in the hell is talking about? Off his rocker...

  • I worked under a practicing Scilon at a mental care home......and she helped the Schizos and Bi-Polars by saying, "Read the Tech, Apply the Tech, and Live the Tech. And if it's not working....YOU AREN'T DOING IT RIGHT" yeah that really helped that patient......she cycled one day after said incident.

  • This disturbing, psychotic shell is all that remains of what could have been a healthy, well-adjusted gay man. Watching this is the surest way to cure Scientology.

  • What an idiot.

  • Can't tell if he is serious, or the simply the best troll ever...

  • HAHAHAHAHAHAHA I like laughing for some reason

  • Am I gonna do it or am I not gonna do it...QUESTION MARK

  • Hey I see vaLLarrr (or some kind of vaLLarrr) is back.

    Just in time for another giant PR 'flap' to humiliate Scientology and expose its kookiness! Google News search "Scientology Debbie Cook" to read about the Cult trying to sue one of its former leaders for speaking her mind. The pure insanity of Scientology is on display.

    Hey vaLLarrr - how do you feel about Debbie being sued for saying basically the same things you've said about greed in Scientology? 'Condition of fear', perhaps?

  • wtf ishe talking about

  • That background got really annoying-_-

  • @vaLLarrr

    Were you L Ron in your past life. LMAO.

  • @AnonRanGER01

    oh no. in other words, I TOLD you where the scientific evidence exists.

    ask your local psychiatrist.

    you need one anyway, so you can kill two birds with one stone.

  • @vaLLarrr So apparently Hubbard lifted the idea for auditing from a psych Dr William Sargant and his treatment for traumatized soldiers called "Abreactive therapy". Figures once a crook always a crook.

  • @sharkattacksteve

    nonsense. "auditing" and "abreactive therapy" are no more alike than Freudian psychoanalysis and auditing, OR abreactive therapy.

    as usual, you have no idea what you're talking about.

  • @vaLLarrr Well I was reading an article about it and they sound very similar and Hubbard was known to own a copy of Sargants book so it must just be a coincidence eh vaL ?

    " William Sargant and others noted this oddity that soldiers gained relief from battle neurosis by re-experiencing either real traumas that happened -OR-, amazingly, imagined traumas that would explain their neurosis."

  • @sharkattacksteve

    OH sure. they sound very "similar."

    just like "nigger" and "niggard" sound very similar, right steve?

    *rollseyes*

  • @vaLLarrr It's self-evident.

  • @sharkattacksteve

    don't bother showing just HOW they "sound similar," steve.

    naturally.

  • @vaLLarrr

    But you said that $cientology merely isn't presenting any scientific evidence to us non-$cientologists because we are too barbaric for thinking psychiatry is not the worst thing ever and not behind everything bad that ever happened anywhere in the universe.

  • @AnonRanGER01

    ya sure.

    that's EXACTLY what I "said" Ranger.

    xD

  • @vaLLarrr

    No, not exactly, but that's the gist of it. Why else would you rant about brain-frying psychiatrists when asked why $cientology isn't presenting any proof for any of its "scientific" claims to the outside world TODAY. The only logical conclusion is that $cientology considers non-$cientologists to be too barbaric to be shown this evidence. Of course, there IS no evidence, just excuses.

    Good night.

  • @AnonRanGER01

    presenting any proof to WHO moron?

    just WHO should they present any proof to?

    geez.

    how stupid can you be.

    *rollseyes*

  • Why do they play the same sound clip over and over?

  • @vaLLarrr

    Well, proving ANY of $cientology's pseudio-scientific bullshit to ANYONE OUTSIDE YOUR CULT would be a good start. Nobody would be able to deny the tech's validity if you were able to do that - but you aren't, because it's bullshit. All you can do is come up with lame ass excuses like "The entire scientific community consists of barbaric idiots who don't know what science is, so of course we don't present any evidence whatsoever to them, see?".

    Pathetic, and far too obvious.

  • can someone please explain to me what a scientologist is, cause i still don't understand!!.......

  • @angel13611

    Just read what Val here has been writing. That'll teach you all you need to know. And don't accept anything you're being told as truth... research it.

  • @angel13611

    Scientology is the most advanced science of the mind and spirit that exists today.

    feel free to go back and read what I wrote, and decide for yourself whether AnonRanger is an idiot or not.

  • @vaLLarrr Listen to yourself, val. 1st you attack science, and then you claim that $cientology is a science to make your quackery sound more credible.

  • @sk8mike

    oh, I am not attacking "science" at ALL.

    I am attacking the so called "experts" who claim they are the "authority" and the "last word" on science, when nothing could be further from the truth.

    these are two entirely DIFFERENT things, of course.

  • @vaLLarrr Oh, you mean like Tom Cruise @ 2:49 "We are ($cientology) the authority on the mind." Are you talking about those "experts", val?

  • @sk8mike

    hey that's Tom Cruise's story.

    good thing what Tom Cruise says is UTTERLY IRRELEVANT except to HIMSELF.

    "What is true for you is what you have observed yourself and when you lose that you have lost everything . Nothing in Dianetics and Scientology is true for you unless you have observed it and it is true according to your observation. That is all."

    LRH

  • @vaLLarrr Don't think critically about your observations. "...And not necessarily maintaining a skeptical attitude, A critical attitude, or an open mind." - L. Ron Hubbard, Personal Integrity

  • @sk8mike

    "quoting out of context", sometimes referred to as "contextomy," is a logical fallacy and type of false attribution in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning...often a means to set up "straw man" arguments...arguments against a position which is not held by an opponent, but which may bear superficial similarity to the views of the opponent."

  • @vaLLarrr Yeah, you should know something about that. Now the trick is to catch you're self while you're doing it, and you'll start making progress.

  • @sk8mike

    gee, just as if that WASN'T complete gibberish, and actually "meant" something mike. LOL

  • @angel13611 a scientologist is someone who believes they are non-corporeal immortal alien being from another universe but over quadrillions of years they have forgotten this and through dianetic processing they can remember this fact and ultimately be free to continue on when their physical body dies.

    in other words they're whack jobs.

  • @AnonRanGER01

    he presented his findings to "actual scientists" who advocate frying PEOPLES' BRAINS, and it MATTERS what they "deemed" it to be?

    are YOU THAT STUPID????

  • @jdtrickster4

    oh, right. because they falsely claimed it worked for THEM, somehow "means" that YOU "know" that that somehow "proves" that ALL claims of it working for ME, and OTHERS "MUST" be false TOO, right tricky?

    as if YOU could know such a thing.

    what an UTTER IDIOT you are.

    are you EVER right, about ANYTHING???

  • @AnonRanGER01

    oh you mean the way Semmelweiss and Pasteur presented their findings to "actual scientists," and were vociferously called "quacks?"

    what about it.

  • @vaLLarrr

    They proved their findings, didn't they? They collected scientific evidence until the truth of their theories could no longer be denied. $cientology has been trying to start a collection for sixty years now. So far, NOTHING. Just taking back more and more of Hubbard's more outrageous claims until only the ones that can't be scientifically proven remain... "You can't prove that you love your mother"-bullshit. Wake up and smell the coffee, Val.

  • @AnonRanGER01

    OH yea. they "proved" their findings. after Semmelweiss' was hounded to DEATH by the "experts," you mean.

    and of course BOLTZMANN proved atoms actually DO exist, AFTER he was relentlessly PERSECUTED to SUICIDE by the "scientific community" for DARING to suggest that atoms exist.

    but of course the "inventor" of the LOBOTOMY was the DARLING of that same community.

    yea, those "scientists" always get it so "right," so mentioning them really "proves" something, doesn't it.

    RIIIIIIIGHT.

  • @vaLLarrr

    Blahblahblah, Val... WHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE?

    Quit insulting every non-$cientologist as some kind of barbarian for a second and provide some PROOF to ANYONE outside of your cult, something your cult has been unable to do for 60 years.

  • @AnonRanGER01

    BLAHBLAHBLAH....it's in the same place as the scientific evidence that electro convulsive "therapy" is safe.

    talk to your local psychiatrist.

    you need one anyway.

  • @vaLLarrr

    So in other words, there IS no scientific evidence whatsoever for any of $cientology's bullshit, because we non-$cientologists are too barbaric to be presented said evidence.

    Did I sum that up right, Val?

  • @vaLLarrr So val I bet you believe you knew all these dead guys from 500 years ago that you're using to justify Hubbards nonsense ?

  • @sharkattacksteve

    what dead guys?

    do you mean "brain dead" like yourself?

  • @vaLLarrr Oh wait what am I saying, you believe you actually were those dead guys LOL carry on rocket man.

  • @vaLLarrr You're not fooling anyone with you crazy rants. Thats a fallacy val. You're using an incomplete comparison to make your argument. No one ever said that science was perfect, or that scientists didn't make mistakes. Furthermore Hubbard schemed up Dianetics/$cientology during the 1950s. To claim that $cientology is above scientific review because of mistakes made during the 1800s, or any time is a ridiculous argument.

    Do you think L Ron Hubbard was perfect?

  • @sk8mike i think he was the perfect marketeer to the psychologically vunerable

  • @sk8mike

    rubbish. then if science isn't "perfect" as you rightfully point out, then DON'T USE IT AS YOUR ARGUMENT.

    and you have no proof that Hubbard "schemed up" Dianetics, which is patently FALSE since Dianetics actually WORKS, as I know PERSONALLY, and YOU DON'T.

    and just what does that "mean" "above scientific review."

    the LOBOTOMY was "scientifically reviewed," as is electro shock "therapy" TODAY and they got it DEAD WRONG.

    why the HELL should these SAME PEOPLE be trusted in ANY WAY??

    HMN?

  • @vaLLarrr You're getting even more ridiculous now. I'm not going to go back to square one with you all over again.

    Everyone knows science isn't perfect, but it's the best, most objective method we have for observing/weighing/measuring/t­esting the world around us. Science is the reason we've made so many medical, and engineering advances that better our way of life. To argue that because science is imperfect it isn't worthy to test $cientology's bullcrap is laughable.

  • @sk8mike

    just because something is an "objective method," doesn't mean that they don't get it DEAD WRONG sometimes, and shouldn't simply be CITED as "reliable," and TRUSTED OUT OF HAND.

    it is YOU who is laughable for expounding this absurd notion.

  • @vaLLarrr Well once again you're trying to discredit science, while at the same time claiming that $cientology is a science.

    Well out of hand val I do trust scientists more than I would ever trust that charlatan, L. Ron Hubbard, or any Scientologist trying to sell their pseudo-science quackery, and pass it off as science.

  • @sk8mike

    oh but I am NOT trying to discredit "science" as you would have it.

    merely the SELF APPOINTED "EXPERTS" like YOURSELF who have ANOINTED themselves as the ARBITERS of what is "science" or not, and who have gotten so DEAD WRONG SO MANY TIMES in the PAST.

    there's a huge difference of between that statement and YOURS, of course.

  • @vaLLarrr All you do is blah blah blah. The difference is that my skepticism is supported by many scientists.

    The best way for you to discredit me would be for you to find some credible sources that support your point of view. That $cientology is an actual science, and not a pseudo-science scam. Good luck finding that!

  • @vaLLarrr

    Isn't an auditor a SELF-APPOINTED "EXPERT?" Acrtually, most $cientologists are SELF-APPOINTED 'EXPERTS.' And when you guys get it wrong, PEOPLE DIE.

    Remember & R.I.P. Lisa McPherson.

  • @vaLLarrr Babble on vaL babble on, maybe Kansas will write a song about you eventually.

  • @vaLLarrr

    You're a funny wacktologist, I guess use all are.

  • @jdtrickster4

    oh you mean you CLAIM it's a "scam" that DIDN'T work for ME, and many thousands of OTHERS who say it DOES work for them.

    like YOU would KNOW whether it actually works for SOMEONE ELSE!!

    and I thought you were simply an IDIOT tricky.

    this "logic" is in a class by itself however. LOL

  • @vaLLarrr

    The problem with that *theory* is the overwhelming majority of those "many thousands" are now OUT of $cientology. They also claimed it "worked" for them while they were in but say exactly the opposite now. How do you explain that? :)

  • @vaLLarrr

    The truth hurts ha lol.

    And yes your wack job CULT leader was in and out of mental institutions, thats why hubbard has banned psychiatry right. Ha I would to if I was seeing space aliens and not wanting to go back to the MENTAL asylum.

    P.S. Hubbard is nothing but a common thief, didnt he get arrested too for petty theft. Oh what a great role model LOL.

  • @TheJack0neill

    oh, I know the truth hurts.

    you don't have to be so butt hurt about it. LOL

  • @AnonRanGER01

    that's EXACTLY RIGHT. he DECIDED not to trust his findings with those who FRY PEOPLES' BRAINS for a living.

    I mean just how "crazy" he must've been, right?

    and YOU are NOT simply an IDIOT. LOL

    RIIIIIIGHT.

    *rolleyes*

  • @vaLLarrr

    But Val, he DID present his findings to scrutiny by actual scientists... and it was deemed to be bullshit. Not a shred of evidence has since appeared that would change that. And we're talking about the scientific community here, Val, not "psychs". Hell, apparently Hubbard was unable to convince ANYONE who didn't take $cientology courses that his mumbo jumbo works. That's why it needs to be "true for you". Because bullshit can only be true for YOU. He was a fraud, Val.

  • @jdtrickster4

    gee, just as if it actually MATTERS if one calls it a "scientific religion," or a "religious science."

    but when ya got NUTHIN' ELSE......right tricky?

  • @vaLLarrr

    What I DO have is that it is NEITHER a science nor a religion but a $CAM!

    But you haven't made it to that level yet; so don't worry about it.

    LOL

  • @vaLLarrr

    Hubbard was insane thats why your great wack job leader was in and out of mental institutions, and yes your CULT does nothing but scam dimwitted morons such as yourself.

  • @TheJack0neill

    wow.

    what a brilliant "argument."

    just as if ANY FOOL like yourself can't simply call someone "insane."

    just like Pasteur was a "quack," right?

    RIIIIIGHT.

  • @AnonRanGER01

    oh you mean YOU CLAIM he was "unable" to do it, rather than simply DECIDED NOT to.

    claim |klām|

    verb [ reporting verb ]

    state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.

    got it.

  • @vaLLarrr

    LOL, yeah, he simply "decided" not to provide any proof whatsoever for ANY of his retarded pseudo-scientific and medical claims like "Scientology heals broken bones within 2 weeks". No way the reason was that it was all BULLSHIT he pulled out of his fat druggie ass and he never did any research at all, right Val? A science-fiction writer who was a proven pathological liar would NEVER do that! Besides, there's this huge conspiracy by psychs who don't want people to be better.

  • @AnonRanGER01

    oh right. Hubbard not releasing his findings to the same "experts" who awarded the NOBEL PRIZE to the "inventor" of the LOBOTOMY, and who STILL allow barbaric electro convulsive "therapy" somehow "means" he "made it up."

    RIIIIIIIGHT.

  • @vaLLarrr

    No, Science-Fiction writer Hubbard being unable to provide any proof, evidence or even research documents or methods, or produce anything that could pass public scrutiny, along with the fact that he is a proven pathological liar somehow means he made it up. I'm looking forward to the research papers on how he almost got run over by a train on Venus.

  • @jdtrickster4

    oh right. "space opera psychotherapy."

    VEEEEERY "specific."

    your USUAL brilliant "argument."

    *rollseyes*

  • @AnonRanGER01

    oh I can't tell you HOW much it distresses me that you think my insults are "lame," even though they're quite creative.

    LOL

  • @vaLLarrr

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, "creative". Sure Val... as creative as Hubbard recycling the plot of his movie script "Revolt in the stars" for the "Wall of Fire" Xenu story.

  • @jdtrickster4

    oh right. you stayed for 27 years in something you are now calling a "scam," because you were too SMART to realize it BEFORE.

    and actually managed to be utterly IGNORANT of actual Scientology TO THIS DAY TO BOOT.

    ROFLMAO

  • @vaLLarrr

    Oh I understand $cientology as well as you do - actually better: For I know itsa $CAM. And the time anyone spends in $cientology is completely irrelevant to the point: Once one *knows* itsa $CAM, there's no turning back. Just alerting others. True for me, y'know. Besides, $cientology and Hubbard were $CAMMING others way before I ever came on the scene. ;)

  • @jdtrickster4 So according to val's logic someone who was a Christian for 27 years and decided it was bullshit must be an idiot ? Oh but wait... vaLs going to claim scientology isn't a belief. LOL

  • @sharkattacksteve

    oh no.

    anyone who accepts things on "faith" in the FIRST place because their mommy taught them to is an idiot IMHO.

    so?

  • @vaLLarrr

    Thank you for insulting almost every religion on the planet, Val.

  • @sharkattacksteve

    and good thing I don't HAVE to "claim" that Scientology is not a "belief."

    "What is true for you is what you have observed yourself and when you lose that you have lost everything . Nothing in Dianetics and Scientology is true for you unless you have observed it and it is true according to your observation. That is all."

    LRH

    where does it say anything there about "belief," hmn steve?

  • @vaLLarrr Soon as you solve that riddle val you shall truly be free. Not to be a spoiler but at the end of OT8 LRH drops the bomb that he mocked the whole thing up. In other words he tells you that you have been a SUCKER for following his delusion but it's your fault not his .

  • @sharkattacksteve

    oh, it's perfectly OK with me that you THINK you know what OT8 is all about steve.

    seen Bigfoot around lately?

    LOL

  • @vaLLarrr And then he has the audacity to say "now that you know what you aren't " i.e engrams, thetans,past lives etc " are you ready to find out what you really are ? " In other words he figures you've been such willing dupes so far even after he basically admits deceiving you, you will continue on being willing sheeple. LOL that Hubbard was a genius eh vaL ?

  • @sharkattacksteve

    Exactly. $cientology is "scientific" religion. Or is it "religious" science? vaLLy can never make its mind up on this. ;-D

    However, steve - as I've already told vaLLy - $cientology is only a science when they tell others about it. It is only in court when they claim it's a religion, and also claim religious persecution by "religious bigots." LOL

  • @AnonRanGER01

    oh no. I say "don't worry about it" because it will just hurt your brain to actually try to "think" and it's not really for your benefit in the first place.

    it's only for people with some actual "intelligence," something you utterly lack.

    see now?

  • @vaLLarrr

    Val, I'm so tired of your lame, repetitive insults. This is not a tr routine training or some shit, and we're not 5 years old anymore. Is this how Scientologists communicate after they took those expensive Scientology communication courses? And you think this public display of $cientology lunacy helps your cult how exactly?

  • @vaLLarrr

    Enuff "actual intelligence" to pay HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS for *space-opera* PSYCHO-therapy, you mean? LOL

  • @vaLLarrr

    And btw, it is $cientology that has all the "EPs" [End Phenomena] for all the processes & the preclear is supposed to VOICE THEM in session indicating he has *made it* or achieved the desired result, i.e., "I mocked up my own reactive mind" or some such, for the "state" of clear, etc.

    If one UTTERS this EP the auditor ends the session & the preclear ATTESTS but if they get in trouble with the law as Rex Fowler & Reed Slatkin did, $ci says they DIDN'T REALLY MAKE IT. ;D

  • @AnonRanGER01

    gee, good thing "certification" is no "guarantee" of anything any more than a UNIVERSITY DIPLOMA "GUARANTEES" that one knows EVERYTHING about a subject.

    DUH

    second, where is it claimed or written that an ACTUAL OT is INCAPABLE of ever screwing up?

    exactly NOWHERE?

    naturally, all that is WAY over your head because you're an idiot.

    don't worry about it.

  • @vaLLarrr

    Look at how defensive you are. Touchy subject, Isn't it? Becausedeep down you know it's all bullshit, but that truth is too horrible to bear.

    I don't know, but every time you write "Don't worry about it", it sounds like a mantra because YOU don't worry about it, because you do. You're worried we might be right.

  • Its all about the Money...

  • @jdtrickster4

    oh RIGHT. like YOU would have a CLUE whether Scientology works for ME MORON, just because it DIDN'T work for YOU.

    how stupid CAN YOU BE??

    *rollseyes*

  • @vaLLarrr

    $cientology is a $cam, vaLLy. And I was not stupid enuff to stay; unlike yourself, y'know. ;D

  • It's never "$cientology DIDN'T 'work'" Oh no! That could never happen. It could never be. ;D

  • @jdtrickster4

    gee, good thing Scientology SAYS NO SUCH THING MORON.

    people declare THEMSELVES to be Clear and OT, NOT SCIENTOLOGY.

    did I mention that you're a complete moron who doesn't know the first thing about actual Scientology, DESPITE you being in it for decades?

    how does one DO that and yet remain UTTERLY IGNORANT like yourself?

    that took skill tricky.

    *rollseyes*

  • @vaLLarrr

    What does it say about "Scientology working" that certified OT's majorly fuck up? Moreso that David Miscavige seems to be surrounded by SP's. LOADS of them. What does that say about "Scientology working"?

  • @vaLLarrr

    Yeah, right. I was one of the ones who "DIDN'T *REALLY* MAKE IT," vaLLy. LOL

  • @jdtrickster4

    rubbish. who says these people "made it?"

    YOU??

    THEY??

    prove it.

    you're simply an idiot.

  • @vaLLarrr

    No, you got it backwards. $cientology says these OTs *made it* to OT after they've payed HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS for this oh so valuable "TACK" and been given a certificate saying they MADE IT.

    Then, when Fowler shoots someone in the back of the head at point blank range or Slatkin embezzles HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS, or Steve Brackett jumps off a BRIDGE committing suicide, $cientology's position is that these people DIDN'T MAKE IT, moron.

    See now?

  • sk8mike, if $cientology "worked," there wouldn't be so many OTs commiting suicide, engaging in criminal activities or being *secret* alcoholics, etc.

    What is $cientology's answer to this? They [these people] DIDN'T REALLY make it.

    It's rigged, I tell ya - itsa $caM! ;-D

  • @vaLLarrr I don't know if any of those psychological disorders have been verified. Science tends to take a long time, and doesn't write their theories in stone, and claim they are facts. Unlike L Ron Hubbard/$cientology.

    Furthermore a Google search on any of those things you mentioned brings up thousands of hits. Unlike $cientology they are not hiding their theories from the public. So their theories, are being tested, and scrutinized.

    Also you need to settle down, and stop posting spam.

  • @sk8mike Look what happens when you Google Xenu.

    "In response to a complaint we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint that caused the removal(s) at ChillingEffects (dot) org."

    Look who's the one trying to control information, and make themselves above public/scientific scrutiny.

  • I know. I'm a 27 yr EX-member. Trust me: Itsa $caM! So, buyer beware.  $cientology promises "total spiritual freedom" but all it causes is the "total vanishment of your hard earned money."

  • @vaLLarrr you answered your own questions. The fact is that psychology/psychiatry are both open to scientific and public scrutiny, and their theories are tested every day.

    Now back to the subject at hand. Where are the scientific/medical studies that have tested and scrutinized $cientology?

    Oh yeah, that's right. $cientology believes they're above scientific, and public scrutiny.

  • @sk8mike

    oh right.

    they're open to "public scrutiny."

    you mean like the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV)?

    "gee, does your 10 year old dislike doing her math homework? better get her to the nearest couch because she's got No. 315.4, "Developmental Arithmetic Disorder."

    reproduceable, to be sure!!

    wonder how many "scientific/medical studies" "scrutinized" THAT one.

    ROFL

  • @sk8mike

    or THESE...

    "or maybe you're a teenager who argues with his parents. Uh oh. Better get some medication PRONTO, because you've got No. 313.8, "Oppositional Defiant Disorder."

    and if your wife won't tell you that she snuck out to the outlet mall last Saturday, then she's definitively got 313.2 "Selective Mutism."

    of course, I am not making any of this up. that would be "Fictitious Disorder Syndrome."

    all "tested and verified" I have NO doubt.

    ROFL

  • @vaLLarrr So all those folks taking anti-depressants and observing they work for them even though you claim they're no better than placebos are different than scientologists who observe the tech works for them without any scientific proof how exactly ?

  • @sharkattacksteve

    hey, they can take all the anti depressants they want as far as I'm concerned.

    what's true for them is true for them, and what I think is irrelevant.

    just don't tell me that it's been "tested and verified."

    what's the problem.

  • @vaLLarrr

    The *problem* is that this is NOT $cientology's nor its front group, CCHR's position. ;D

  • @vaLLarrr " just don't tell me that it's been "tested and verified." "

    I never have .

    And just don't tell me dianetics/scientology "tech" has been testified and verified like LRH and CoS has been telling the wog world for the last 60 years.

  • @sharkattacksteve

    who said I said or that LRH said that it was "tested and verified" by the "experts?"

    not ME.

    you?

  • @vaLLarrr There have been numerous ads for Dianetics that have claimed that it was scientifically tested and 100% accurate since the very beginnings.

  • @sharkattacksteve

    rubbish. show me one ad that claims Scientology was tested by the "scientific community."

    and if Hubbard tested it scientifically then it's "scientifically tested" nitwit.

    and if you don't believe that, then find out for yourself.

    and if not, who cares.

    not ME.

  • @vaLLarrr

    "IF" being the key word here. IF Hubbard tested it. No research documents anywhere to be found. Just him writing shit up, making it up as he went along.

  • @vaLLarrr " and if Hubbard tested it scientifically then it's "scientifically tested" nitwit."

    Even if he wasn't a scientist ? Now that's "magical thinking" in a nutshell and I'm not going to insult you cause I don't pick on the feeble minded.

  • @sharkattacksteve

    gee. do "scientists" have it tattooed on their forehead steve?

    was Giordano Bruno a "scientist" steve.

    *rollseyes*

  • @sharkattacksteve

    and it was the OTHER idiot who said it's been tested and verified. I wasn't referring to you personally.

  • @vaLLarrr

    You're an idiot! Don't put words in my mouth, I never said that.

  • Changes can and DO happen in the field of psychology BUT no change can occur to the *$cientology tack* [my take on "tech"] because it is already works and changing or altering it [as David Miscavige has done, btw] is called SQUIRRELING in $cientology and it is a suppressive HIGH CRIME to do so.

    So we get [with $cientology] a so called "science" that cannot change or be altered. This is punishable and can get one expelled from the "RELIGION."

  • Scientology is just a huge scam dressed up as a 'religion'

  • @funkmasterjee

    how do you know it's a "scam?"

    what if it actually works?

  • @vaLLarrr It's a scam. If $cientology worked $cientology would not have any problems submitting their theories to scientific/medical review boards to test and verify their claims. Moreover we all know that $cientology will never make their theories available for scientific and public scrutiny, because we all know what would happen if they did.

  • @sk8mike

    nonsense of course.

    just what "theory" has PSYCHOLOGY ever "make available" that has ever been "verified" to "work?"

    but that's NOT a scam, right mike?

  • @vaLLarrr So you believe that people engage in self destructive behavior because of engrams and implants as opposed to the simple explanation that it is pleasurable and that the mind has a mechanism that dulls painful memories causing people to repeat self destructive behavior ?

    Check out " Occam's razor " sometime vaL LOL

  • @sharkattacksteve

    let me get this straight.

    you're saying that some people commit suicide because it's "pleasurable,"

    and that the mind has a "mechanism" that "dulls painful memories" allowing people to simply IGNORE the most basic INSTINCT OF ALL, SURVIVAL?

    if it's such A BASIC INSTINCT, then why would they do the OPPOSITE NITWIT.

    *rollseyes*

    that makes about as much "sense" as everything ELSE you say steve. LOL

    and just where is your "evidence" for any of that?

    take all the time ya need. LOL

  • @vaLLarrr

    Quite a few very high level homo novice OT ubermensch commit suicide, too. And they have had removed or *erased* that part of the mind that causes depression, negative emotions, etc. - the reactive mind. What's up with that?

    I thought $cientology "worked???" IF it did OTs wouldn't be commiting suicide or engaging in criminal activities, witness, Steve Brackett (OT6), Reed Slatkin (OT5), Rex Fowler (OT7? 8?) They were all sevewral levels above "CLEAR."

  • @vaLLarrr 'you're saying that some people commit suicide because it's "pleasurable," '

    I never said that vaL nice try. Self destructive behavior like addiction isn't the same as conscious suicide.

    And I'll show you my "evidence" as soon as you show me your evidence of engrams, reincarnation and implant stations on Mars. You really have no idea how ridiculous your position is do you ? You think you're being perfectly logical and that's the really bewildering thing about all of this.

  • @sk8mike

    just how was the LOBOTOMY, for which the "inventor" was awarded the NOBLE PRIZE IN MEDICINE, "tested and verified" to work, hmn steve?

    just how was electro convulsive "therapy" submitted to a "scientific/medical review board" and "verified" to be safe and effective?

    how was the diagnosis of "ADHD" "tested and verified" as a bona fide "diagnosis?"

    HMN?

    not "scams," right mike?

    can you spell HYPOCRITE?

  • @sk8mike

    $cientology believes that these people are *suppressive* & would destroy $cientology. Review boards have not attained the *knowingness* that can only be achieved thru the use of $cientology in one's life. One has to be con-verted first, though. That's what LRH taught. He says in the book History of Man that it took the medical profession decades to catch on to *prenatals* (pre-natal engrams); so there was no need to prove anything to sleeping sapiens, just yet. ;-D

  • @sk8mike

    "Anti-depressants taken by thousands of Brits 'do NOT work', major new study reveals

    By FIONA MCRAE

    12:32 26 February 2008

    Anti-depressant tablets taken by millions of Britons may be a waste of time and money, research shows."

    CONT....

  • @sk8mike

    CONT...

    "An analysis of dozens of studies involving thousands of patients revealed that some of the most widely-prescribed anti-depressants work little better than dummy pills.

    The drugs studied - including Prozac, Seroxat and Efexor - were little more effective than placebos in improving the mental health in the majority of cases, the University of Hull research showed."

    NOT a scam, RIGHT MIKE???

  • @sk8mike

    @sk8mike

    gee, wonder if Prozac is still on the market in that case?

    and how many BILLIONS it and others made for their respective pharmaceutical companies?

  • @vaLLarrr there are plenty of people that used to be scientologists that will tell you it IS a scam

  • You have to be retarded to believe in this shit. It's all a scam to make money, that's all

  • @DmechNorth

    Very true, people who believe in any religion have misfiring neurons and an unbalance with the part of the brian that gives us understanding in the meaning of life.

    People think they need purpose in life, that is not true at all.

  • @18T220

    one doesn't need a purpose in life?

    how's that.

  • @vaLLarrr It's called existence vaL,ya know living your life for life's sake not being a follower, fanatic, fundamentalist, militant " jihadist " who feels empty unless they have some cause to believe in and subjugate their individuality to, like yourself for example.

    I would suggest you read "The True Believer" by Eric Hoffer but I know that would be pointless until you blow Wonderland.

  • @sharkattacksteve

    what does that "mean," "for life's sake?"

    isn't that a purpose?

  • @sharkattacksteve

    why bother living your life "for life's sake?"

    why not just die?

  • @sharkattacksteve

    Scientology says the purpose of life is to survive.

    how is that different from what you are saying?

    hmn, steve?

  • @vaLLarrr Survival is the most basic of all instincts you shouldn't need LRH and years of courses costing thousands of $ to teach you that.Survival and pleasure val that's all there is and I learned that from a book by the Marquis de Sade when i was 14 that cost me a couple of dollars. LOL

  • @sharkattacksteve

    oh, but LRH teaches much MORE than that.

    furthermore, you don't even know HOW organisms survive.

    if it is such a basic instinct, just why do people engage in self destructive behavior, like committing suicide?

    hmn steve?

  • @sharkattacksteve

    how do you know I'm not LIBERATING my individuality instead of "subjugating" it?

    maybe it is YOU who is subjugating your individuality by letting yourself be brainwashed against Scientology by all this "anonymous" claptrap.

    just as the GERMANS allowed themselves to be brainwashed against the JEWS in WWII.

    do you think the Germans who went into agreement with Hitler thought of themselves as "subjugated?"

    ever think of that steve?

  • @vaLLarrr Anonymous doesn't have the power to brainwash anyone. They can't control what everyone watches, or reads. Furthermore Anonymous believes in freedom of information. $cientoloy on the other hand controls what their followers read/watch, and they spend millions trying to control information, by stalking/harassing critics, as well as journalists/reporters, and threating websites/search engines with lawsuits to censor websites with critical information about Scientology.

  • @vaLLarrr Anonymous doesn't have the power to brainwash anyone. They can't control what everyone watches, or reads. Furthermore Anonymous believes in freedom of information. $cientoloy on the other hand controls what their followers read/watch, and they spend millions trying to control information, by stalking/harassing critics, as well as journalists/reporters, and threating websites/search engines with lawsuits to censor websites with critical information about Scientology.

  • What Tom would do when he stops at the accident scene:

    "Touch Assists" "Locational Assists" "Nerve Assists"

    Here is an example:

    "Touch Assists": Scientologists descended on India in the wake of the Tsunami to save lives with "touch assists," which, according to this Washington Post story, consisted of a mechanic from Michigan touching people and saying "feel my finger" over and over and over again.

  • can't tell the diff btw a Christan and a Scientologists ...

  • @jojoinhere

    The former believe in Chris and the latter, in Lord Xenu.

  • This guy is totally insane!

  • Rip

  • Is Tom Cruise GAY?

  • WTF with the music??!?

  • Tom Cruise is NOT dead! His sanity might be gone... But he is still alive...

  • Trolling must be so much harder now that there's an internet. -_-

  • poor Katie.......

    T_T

    

  • The R.I.P. comments are wacktology propaganda.

  • why the RIP coments?!!! I'm half retarded so do not understand the reason for these comments :)