Reasons to Picket -
Wynot: Differences Between Science and Scientology
Subject: Re: Fighting Scientology
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 04:37:11 GMT
References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 19:01:01 GMT, firstname.lastname@example.org (lurkmonster)
>Have you noticed, that most critics seem to have an overwhelming
>need for the destruction of Scientology?
Actually, Lurkie, I believe I am one of the few on here who thinks
that Scientology should be removed from the face of the earth. The
reason I feel that way is the way your cult pretends to be
scientific. May I point out some of the differences between science
1: Science begins with the observation of reality. Scientology
begins with the denial that reality exists. (MEST?)
2: Science teaches that facts must be independently verifiable.
Scienology says that 'it's true if it's true for you'.
3: Science involves the formulation of hypotheses which may proved
or disproved by experiment. Scientology maintains that Hubbard
taught all the truth there is, and needs not present any
4: Science does not accept anecdotal evidence. Scientology presents
no other kind.
5: When scientists are presented with evidence that something they
believe is incorrect, all but a very few will change their beliefs.
Scientologists in the same condition claim the evidence is biased
because the presenter has a criminal past life.
6: The scientist's view of the universe has changed constantly over
the past 20 - 50 years, as new evidence has shown that previous
ideas were incorrect, or not complete enough. Scientology teachings
have remained remarkably static for 50 years, and entirely so since
Hubbard died (where are those new OT levels that have been promised
for so long?).
That is enough for now, monster person (I gotta' admit, you
got a nick just made for having fun with)... If you wish to believe
fantasies about previous lives, alien implants, and intergalactic
invaders, I have no problem with that, but so long as your church
pretends to be a science I will personally hope that it ceases to
exist, and actively endeavor to spread my opinion (in the form of
anti - pseudo-science memes). Once, at a picket, a passerby asked if
I though Scientologists were bad people. I told him that I did not
think that, only that they were deluded by Scientology, and wasting
their good hopes for a better life and world on beliefs which are
fallacies. Building their castles on sand...
Please Lurkmonster, demand proof. When they tell you they closed
down all the asylums in Italy, call your local Italian consulate or
embassy, like I did, and find out. When they tell you that 2 million
South African children were taught to read, ask where are the lists?
Ask why the South African government disavows any knowledge of such
a program? (South Africa has never been any trouble for Scientology
that I have heard of, btw.) Okay?
'Til next time;
The Few, The Proud, The Banned;
2x on the Scieno-nanny.
Pickets are the one thing that Scientology hates the most because
they can't lie to their members about it, at least to the ones who
see it.. They can't demonstrate their OT abilities and 'postulate'
people away using Tone 40, which invalidates them. This is a direct
confront to their great powers and is what they hate the most and
all the lies they tell their members is only a picket away from
LRonsScam, in a post to a.r.s.
'Til next time;