The Kotzé Report

<Prior  |  Table of Contents  |  Next>

SECTION III

CHAPTER 8
THE E-METER.

8.1.    The E-Meter is the abbreviated name assigned by adherents of the Scientology movement to the Hubbard Electrometer. This apparatus is prominently used in Scientology processing or auditing and is freely advertised for sale in the United Kingdom at £60,000 (Stg) as —

"… the most important tool in the technology of Scientology and Dianetics.

…

… INDISPENSABLE."[01]

As recently as August and November, 1971, it was advertised in the Republic of South Africa at a purchase price of R115,000.[02]

8.2.    Mr. Hubbard currently defines the E-Meter as —

"An electronic device for measuring the mental state and change of state of homo sapiens …"[03]

8.3.    The Model originally used was the Mark I. With the passage of time it became more streamlined, possibly a bit more sensitive and developed to the model now in use styled the Mark V.[04] The Mark V model is identical in operation and function to the Azimuth Alignment Meter.[05] The Mark V model is supplied in a wooden box with a detachable lid which when hinged and hooked to the box containing the instrument serves as a support for the latter in a semi-upright position so as to conceal the face of the instrument from the person being audited. The Azimuth Alignment Meter is supplied in a leather case and is stood up against a soft metal rod in a like position for the same reason. Each instrument will, for reasons of convenience, hereinafter be referred to as "the E-Meter" or "the meter".

8.4.    The face of the E-Meter consists of a Tone Arm, a Tone Arm Dial, a Sensitivity Knob, a Testing Switch, a Needle, a Needle Dial and an Adjusting Switch. A pair of ordinary tin cans attached to an electrical wire is plugged into the meter. According to Mr. Hubbard the inner workings are —

"… intricate … made to … exact specification. The technically minded will see that is has a 'printed' circuit (thus avoiding mis-duplication) and is fully transistorised (no delicate valves or tubes). It is robust but as with all precision instruments should be handled with respect and care … Only half a volt is passed through the body."[06]

8.5.    The person to be audited is called on to hold the two tin cans — one in each hand. The auditor then asks questions.

8.6.    According to Mr. Hubbard —

1. "The Tone Arm registers Density of Mass (ridges, pictures, machines, circuits) in the mind of the preclear. This is actual mass, not imaginary, and can be weighed, measured by resistance etc. … The Tone Arm registers State of Case at any given time in processing … also … advance of case during processing by moving."[07]

   "Used, for instance, at a road block, if the subject took the electrodes in hand and the E-Meter was adjusted to read, the tone arm would tell at once whether the person should be questioned further. A tone-arm too high or too low would mark the subject that should be interrogated at length. Sixty persons an hour could be checked by one machine in the hands of one operator by using the tone arm only. And every person with a bad tone arm reading could be set aside for additional testing. All this has held true in tens of thousands of cases."[08]

2. "The Needle shows case significance and reality."[09]

   "The machine reads the emotional reaction to the questions. Whenever the needle dips a bit the answer is 'Maybe'. When the needle dips a great deal, the machine is answering 'Yes'. When the needle does not dip at all, the answer is 'No' or 'Not Guilty'."[10]

3. "The Needle shows … What to run. The Tone Arm shows How it is Running."[11]

   "In South Africa a Bantu's withholds read not on the needle alone but on the Tone Arm as well."[12]

4. "The Sensitivity Knob is a magnifying glass for the needle,"[13a] since it "increases the swing of the needle."[13b]

8.7.   

1. During November, 1963, the meter and its method of use in Scientology processing were described as follows:

   "The E-Meter is actually a psycho-galvanometer invented about 80 years ago. It is capable of being used as a lie detector. Our modern meter is a transistor version and is tuned to detect overcharged mental areas. It is used during sessions to find areas of stress in the mind and to verify the auditor's and preclear's conclusions. It does not diagnose and will not cure illness and has never been used as such."[14]

2. During 1966 the following description of the meter is given:

   "Technically it is a specially developed 'Wheatstone Bridge' well known to electrically minded people as a device to measure the amount of resistance to a flow of electricity."[15]

3. Still later during 1968 the meter and its method of use were described as follows:

   "A '20th Century Confessional Aid', the patented Hubbard Electrometer is a precise electronic response indicator used in the exact technology of Scientology Confessional and Pastoral Counselling."[16]

8.8.    Remarkable claims are made on behalf of the E-Meter. These inter alia include:

1. "No person can be cleared without it."[17a]
2. "It tells the auditor what the mind of the preclear is doing when the preclear is made to think of something."[17b]
3. "It is omniscient — it knows more about the pre-clear than the pre-clear."[17c]
4. "An E-Meter … ably distinguishes the subversive or the criminal from honest men."[18a]
5. "The new model reads emotional reactions and disagreement … whether the subject talks or not."[18b]

6. It is capable of distinguishing between honest and dishonest employees and of restoring confidence between employer and employee.[19]

7. In South Africa terrorism and its attendant dangers can be fought more effectively by E-Meters than by guns, since only Scientologists with meters could detect subversives.[20]

8.9.    Neither in Mr. Hubbard's books nor in evidence before the Commission are the claims referred to in the preceding paragraph substantiated or proved. They rest in the main on the ipse dixit of Mr. Hubbard or other spokesmen of the Church of Scientology.

8.10.    Dr. G.K. Nelson, head of the division of neuro-psychology in the National Institute of Personnel Research, gave expert evidence to the Commission on the E-Meter.[21a] He confirmed that it is indeed based on the principle of the Wheatstone Bridge, that is has a number of ranges of sensitivity and that it is an instrument capable of detecting changes in the reaction of the skin. The witness stated that the meter has a certain value as a lie-detector but considered that it has very little value in ascertaining changes of emotion. It can certainly be used to obtain confessions. In conclusion[21b] the witness expressed the view that tests made by the meter are virtually of no value at all unless done under ideal scientific laboratory conditions and even then their value remains unknown by reason of the danger inherent in inferring personality patterns and reactive dispositions from movements of a needle of a dial.

8.11.    Mrs. M.J. Nicholson testified that in the days when she received processing the E-Meter was extensively used during security checking. She expressed the view that —

"… the angrier you get, you get a stronger read on the meter. This is where it falls down completely."[22]

Mrs. Nicholson explained that in her case this conclusion was demonstrated by persistent questioning directed at her for a total period of two days as to whether she had ever slept with a preclear.

8.12.    The Commission is satisfied beyond any serious doubt that the claims made on behalf of the E-Meter are intensified beyond the limits of truth. It is an instrument capable of detecting and registering skin reactions to electricity. Skilfully used or abused it could unearth close and personal secrets. It is scientifically of no value in testing emotions, feelings or reactions of persons. It has no value in itself in the treatment of psycho-somatic or other illnesses. It is no more than an aid to infuse suggestions made by an auditor into the mind of the person subjected to auditing. As an aid to auditing its true value is highly questionable. Since the recommendations made in paragraphs 5.45 to 5.52 of Chapter 5 supra are sufficiently wide in their scope to control the use of the E-Meter and similar devices by unsuitable persons, no positive recommendation is considered necessary.

8.13.    It seems probable in a high degree that recent insistence by the Church of Scientology that the meter does not diagnose and will not cure illness and is not intended or effective for use in diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease was inspired by action taken in the United States of America against the E-Meter and related writings under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. sections 301 et seq. (1964). The most recent event in this action is, to the best of the Commission's knowledge, the Memorandum Opinion, delivered by District judge Gerhard Gesell, which inter alia contains the undermentioned passage:

"Hubbard and his fellow Scientologists developed the notion of using an E-meter to aid auditing. Substantial fees were charged for the meter and for auditing sessions using the meter. They repeatedly and explicitly represented that such auditing effectuated cures of many physical and mental illnesses. An individual processed with the aid of the E-meter was said to reach the intended goal of 'clear' and was led to believe there was reliable scientific proof that once cleared many, indeed most illnesses would automatically be cured. Auditing was guaranteed to be successful. All this was and is false — in short, a fraud. Contrary to representations made, there is absolutely no scientific or medical basis in fact for the claimed cures attributed to E-meter auditing."[23]

8.14.    The action referred to in the preceding paragraph began to unfold in August, 1962, although the seizure of meters and literature only took place during January, 1963.[24] However a deviation in policy was announced on 29th October, 1962 —

"In view of the 'interest' the Food and Drug Administration has in the E-Meter, …"[25]

On the date mentioned Mr. Hubbard further wrote:

"The use of the E-Meter in Scientology, but not Dianetics, is describable as follows:

'All religions seek truth.

'Freedom of the spirit is only to be found on the road to Truth.

'Sin is composed, according to Scientology, of Lies and hidden actions and is therefore Untruth.

'The Electrometer is used to disclose truth to the individual who is being processed and thus free him spiritually.

'Only in this way can Man's spiritual self be regained.

'A religious confessional fails only when not guided by a modern instrument such as the Electrometer.

'Religions in the 1960's use modern aids. The Electrometer is a valid religious instrument, used in confessionals, and is in no way diagnostic and does not treat.

'Regardless of any earlier uses of psychogalvanometers in Dianetics or psychology or in early Scientology publications when research was in progress, the Electrometer in Scientology today has no other use than as directed above.' …

"Dianetics used an older instrument to detect engrams. The book Electropsychometric Auditing is entirely a Dianetic manual."[26]

8.15.    A manual containing twenty-seven detailed E-Meter drills by Mr. Hubbard has been compiled by Mary Sue Hubbard[27] and is designed for use in training in Scientology. The student auditor receives his training at the hands of a coach who uses the drills.

8.16.    The Commission draws attention to the use which can be made of the E-Meter in Security Checking. The role envisaged for the meter in this regard is as follows:

1. "In using the meter for Security Checking you establish needle response to common (non-meaningful) questions. Seeing this, you do not mistake a real fall when it comes.

2. On meaningful questions you look for falls. A fall means 'Oh, oh! He's got me'. You don't leave a question that is getting a fall response until you are sure you have been told all and the needle no longer falls when you ask that question.

3. If the needle still falls on the question, you have one of two things:

   1. the preclear hasn't told all; or
   2. it's in a past life and he doesn't consciously know about it (since the meter precedes preclear consciousness).

4. In the case of (a) you keep asking in various ways until it's cleared (no fall even with a high sensitivity knob — and you do turn up the knob on a question that didn't respond well at first and then turn it back before you go on to the next).

5. In the case of a past life possibility you add, 'In this lifetime' to your security question. As you repeat that, if the misdeed was in a past life, the fall will vanish.

6. A person being security checked is subject to mental dispersal. You may get only one fall and then no fall at all for one or two repeats and then a fall. You haven't asked quite the right question. The preclear is trying to ignore it. The rule is, if you get a trace of a fall or reaction on a question, beat it to death by varying your wording of the question or slightly shift the type of question. In any event, be sure not to leave a trace of a reaction or a single reaction until you are certain it won't develop.

7. If the preclear tells you a withhold, always (as in all Rudiments) ask the question again as this might not be all of it.

8. The fall comes out if the preclear tells all. The fall stays or gets worse if the preclear is hedging.

9. On a security check sheet, follow up every change of characteristic before you go on. Change of characteristic, if it amounts to anything, will develop into a fall.

10. If the preclear hasn't told all (or it's a past life) the meter won't clear.

11. Don't be fooled by excuses. Don't discredit the meter (the preclear's first attempt when he's in a really tight spot).

12. The meter is right.

13. If a question won't clear it's (a) or (b) above and that's the total of it.

14. Grim experience of a decade has taught me that it's (a) or (b) and never 'I moved the needle myself' or 'I feel nervous just generally'. The E-Meter is right even when it seems to make the preclear wrong.

15. The mark of a good Security Checker is thorough, swinish suspicion and no belief in mankind or the devil — only the meter.

16. PEOPLE'S CASES WILL NOT MOVE UNTIL THEY ARE CLEAR ON ALL WITHHOLDS, SO A THOROUGH CHECK IS REALLY A KINDNESS AFTER ALL."[28]

8.17.    The conclusions set out in paragraph 8.12 supra were arrived at on the evidence adduced to the Commission and on the literature available to it. Regard being had to the technical nature of the meter, the Commission, kindly assisted by Dr. Nelson, obtained from the National Institute for Personnel Research of the South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Research a technical report on an E-Meter purchased by the Commission through the attorneys who acted for the Church of Scientology in South Africa (Proprietary) Limited. A copy of the said report has been submitted to the attorneys aforementioned, who on the 27th March, 1972, submitted their client's reply to the Secretary of the Commission. The verbatim contents of the report and reply are set out in paragraphs 8.18 and 8. 20 infra. Neither the report nor the reply (which is critical of Dr. Nelson in his personal capacity) disturbs the conclusions set out in paragraph 8.12 supra and the Commission adheres to the said conclusions.

8.18.    The report referred to in the preceding paragraph is quoted hereunder in extenso:

1. "The following items were submitted to us for examination:—

   1. The Book Introducing the E-Meter; by L. Ron Hubbard, Copyright 1966 by L. Ron Hubbard, published by the Hubbard College of Scientology (Church of Scientology of California Incorporated in the U.S.A. with limited liability. Registered in England), 1966.

   2. The Book of E-Meter Drills; by L. Ron Hubbard, compiled by Mary Sue Hubbard, published by the Hubbard College of Scientology (Church of Scientology of California, Incorporated in U.S.A. with limited liability, Reprinted in England), 1965 (photocopy);

   3. Annexure K.S.7 - 0 (photocopy) HCO Dissemination Division Advice Letter of 29th November, 1965.

   4. One cardboard carton containing a wooden case housing an instrument labelled 'Hubbard Electrometer for use in Scientology British Mk V Meter'.

2. The above items were examined with the following results:

   1. The Book Introducing the E-Meter.
      p. 1 : A photograph of the closed case of the E-Meter is presented with the comment that the instrument consists of a 'specially developed "Wheatstone Bridge" …' (see 2.4 [2.d]);
      p. 2 : A photograph (apparently of a coil of ripcord) accompanies a caption relating to the electrical conductivity of materials;
      p. 3 : A photograph of a human body, covered except for the feet (with shoes) and arms, is accompanied by a caption which alleges that 'The resistance of a dead female body is 5,000 ohms and of a dead male body, 12,500 ohms.' There is no known scientific basis for this allegation. On the contrary, it is well known that skin resistance (as measured by scalp electrodes as used in electroencephalography) rises to and exceeds 50 000 ohms at the moment of death and increases thereafter. There is no known scientific evidence of a sex difference in this respect.
      p. 4 : The figures quoted (500 ohms to 1 000 000 ohms) are approximately correct, but the reference to 'a body when it is inhabited' is obscure;
      p. 5 : The assertions comprise an oversimplification and exaggeration of known facts;
      p. 6 : No scientific inference can be made;
      p. 9 : See later comments under 2.4 [2.d];
      pp. 10 – 12 : No useful comment can be offered;
      pp. 13 – 34 : See comments under 2.4 [2.d];
      pp. 35 – 46 : The language is not always standard English and is, for other reasons also, often obscure; no scientific definitions or evidence are advanced;
      p. 57 : There seem to be no pages between p. 46 and p. 57 which contains information on how to buy an E-Meter ($150-00 U.S.) and how to obtain training in its use.

   2. The Book of E-Meter Drills : On the first page of the photocopy submitted appear the words 'The E-Meter is not intended or effective for the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease.' The language, terminology and syntax of the succeeding pages are often so esoteric as to defy precise analysis.

   3. HCO Dissemination Division Advice Letter of 29th November, 1965.
      This comprises technical instructions relating to the calibration of the E-Meter.

   4. The 'E-Meter'
      This comprises a wooden case measuring approximately 245 x 163 x 72 mm. An upper portion with a depth of approximately 28 mm. is a removable lid, revealing a panel comprising the following : a switch/potentiometer, labelled OFF, 1 – 32; a potentiometer labelled 1 – 6; a switch with three positions marked 'set', 'transit' and 'test'; a potentiometer labelled 'trim'; a meter calibrated as follows from left to right: RISE (six divisions), SET (gaps on either side), FALL (nine divisions) and TEST (approximately two divisions). The device is a modified Wheatstone Bridge with built-in amplifier and re-chargeable nickel-cadmium cell power supply. Its use in the assessment of personality, psychological differences and behavioral adjustment is so limited as to be of negligible value, for the following reasons:

      1. As used in Scientology (see 2.1 [2.a] and 2.2 [2.b]) the instrument is capable of transducing, but not recording, changes in skin resistance. Thus interpretations are entirely a function of the observations of the tester ('auditor') and not subject to verification.

      2. There is no simple and consistent relationship between skin resistance, or changes in this variable, on the one hand, and psychological adjustment or behavioral variables on the other;

      3. 'Basal' levels of skin resistance and changes in respect of this variable are, in the context in which this instrument is apparently used, subject to uncontrolled influence by such factors as the following:

         1. variations in pressure with which the electrodes ('cans') are held;
         2. polarization of these electrodes;
         3. uncontrolled, uncontrollable, and in any event unregistered, variations in respect of arousal level, attention and motivation of the testee;

      4. No account appears to be taken of the observed fact that individuals may be classified into three types in respect of changes in skin resistance (galvanic skin response), viz. stable, stable/labile and labile. In this connection the attention of the Commission is respectfully drawn to the enclosed publications.

CONCLUSION:

The 'E-Meter', considered as an instrument in relation to the literature supplied by the Commission and in the context in which it is apparently used by the Church of Scientology, is not a scientific method for assessing or measuring human behavior.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The following provided invaluable assistance in the compilation of this report:

Mr. R.D. Griesel Acting Head, Division of Neuropsychology, National Institute for Personnel Research, CSIR:

Mr. H.J.S. Fuller National Electronical Engineering Research Institute, CSIR."

8.19.    The publications referred to in paragraph 2.4.4 [2.d.iv] of the report are an article on "The Psychophysiological Significance of the Galvanic Skin Response" by A.C. Mundy-Castle and B.L. McKiever contributed to Vol. 46, No. 1, July, 1953, of the Journal of Experimental Psychology and an article on "Galvanic Skin Response" by R.W. Alnutt, W.C. Becker and R.E. Barbiere (1964).

8.20.    The reply referred to in paragraph 8.17 supra is quoted hereunder in extenso:

"A copy of the report submitted to the Commission by Dr. Nelson was handed to us and we wish to comment thereon as follows.

Dr. Nelson (Mr. Nelson as he then was) gave evidence before the commission during October 1969. Dr. Nelson is in possession of a Ph.D.-degree as well as an M.A. degree in Psychology and is presently head of the division of neuro psychology as the National Institute of Personnel Research of the C.S.I.R. Although Dr. Nelson gave evidence before the commission, he was never recalled to submit his report under oath and could consequently not be cross-examined on this evidence. It is further submitted with respect, that Dr. Nelson as a psychologist, is not qualified to testify on the E-Meter as an electronic device and the fact that it is a registered scientific patent acknowledged as such in the U.K., the U.S.A. and elsewhere. Nor is Dr. Nelson qualified to give evidence on the scientific merits of the device as such. In contradistinction to testifying as regards the implementation of the E-Meter. It is one thing to testify how to drive a motor-car but it is a different proposition to testify as regards the inner workings of an internal combustion engine. Even on the basis of implementation of the E-Meter Dr. Nelson's ability to express an opinion on the E-Meter is questioned. (cf. our comments ad paragraph 2.1 [2.a]).

Dr. Nelson's report is merely an expression of his own opinion and nowhere, as can be expected in view of his qualifications, does he rely on scientific facts, data, experiments or authorities for his views.

His report is commented on seriatim as follows:

Ad. 2.1

No scientific facts are put forward by Dr. Nelson for his allegation to disprove that the resistance of a dead female body is 5000 ohms and a dead male body 12,500 ohms. Surely, Dr. Nelson should disprove the validity of this proposition by way of experiments which he obviously failed to carry out, alternatively, he could have relied on the experiments of another scientist as for instance a pathologist. Dr. Nelson's report could have been of value to the commission if he had conducted experiments in which he disproved the relevant assertion, but in its present form it is a mere expression of opinion.

If it is Well Known that skin resistance rises to and exceeds 50000 ohms at the moment of death and increases thereafter, where are the literature references to this allegation? The resistance of a dead body varies depending on the type of measuring instrument used, and an uncorrelated comparison between scalp electrodes as used in electroencephalography and hand electrodes as used with the E-Meter is without Scientific Validity, even when done by a Scientist.

The 'obscurity' which Dr. Nelson finds in the reference to 'a body when it is inhabited' reveals the enormous gulf between the Church's actual use of the E-Meter as an instrument in the practice of our religion and Dr. Nelson's own basis of criticism. 'Body inhabited' refers to the soul or spirit in a human body before death. It is obvious from Dr. Nelson's view that there is no common ground between us.

Ad Page 5 of Dr. Nelson's comment on 'The Book Introducing the E-Meter'

Dr. Nelson refrains from giving the commission the real 'unsimplified and unexaggerated' known facts. Again, Dr. Nelson merely expresses an opinion for which no scientific facts are advanced. It must be borne in mind on the other hand that The Book Introducing the E-Meter was not written for scientists but it is a simple practical guide for everyday use.

Ad Page 6 – 9; 10 – 12; 13 – 34

No comment is made in this regard.

Ad Pages 35 – 46

Dr. Nelson's comment is absolutely meaningless. If Dr. Nelson consulted the Scientology dictionary the English would not have been obscure to him. He does not give what the other reasons are as to why the English is obscure. This paragraph of Dr. Nelson's report is so vague that it is extremely difficult to reply thereto. Where Dr. Nelson says that the book contains no scientific definitions or evidence, it must again be pointed out that the book has no scientific pretentions and is merely a guide for everyday use.

Ad Page 57

Dr. Nelson's comment is not understood.

Ad 2.2

If Dr. Nelson fails to understand the significance of the exhibit, it is simply because he did not refer to the Scientology dictionary and is therefore not in a position to express an opinion.

Ad 2.3

No comment is made.

Ad 2.4

Dr. Nelson overlooks the fact that the E-Meter is a patented instrument which in terms of the Patents Act must be an 'invention … new, useful and not obvious to those skilled in the art to which it relates'. (Terrell on Patents 11th Edition, 1965 at 0. 5).

Dr. Nelson writes that 'its use in the assessment of personality, psychological differences and behavioural adjustment is … of negligible value'. He supports this with reasons, but his reasons are in the nature of pronouncements and not scientific arguments. However, since the E-Meter is not used in the assessment of personality, psychological differences and behavioural adjustment, Dr. Nelson's views are irrelevant.

Ad Conclusion

1. Dr. Nelson apparently did not understand more than half of the literature supplied by the Commission as it was too 'esoteric' and 'obscure'.

2. Dr. Nelson has no idea of the context in which the literature is 'apparently' (sic) used by the Church of Scientology. In his evidence to the Commission on 27th April 1970 (Vol. 37 p. 105) Dr. Nelson admitted that the stated purpose for which Scientologists use the E-Meter was 'not entirely clear' to him. He also admitted that it was only an 'impression' and that he didn't know if it was correct or not, and that he obtained it by hearsay.

   He further admitted on p. 109 of Vol. 37 that he and the Church are talking a different language — 'I think the difficulty here is that we are dealing with things on quite different logical levels, perhaps in different logical categories'. In cross-examination by Advocate Mentz in relation to the logical category in which the Church employs the E-Meter, Dr. Nelson said, 'I don't profess to be an expert in this field'. In the document now under discussion, Dr. Nelson further confirms that he does not understand the context, with his statement 'the reference to a body when it is inhabited is obscure'.

   Here Dr. Nelson has run up against a similar situation as several other witnesses did. That is, they are looking at Scientology from a medical/psychological viewpoint and are puzzled when Scientology does not fit into this category. Scientology is not and does not profess to be in the field of medicine or modern day psychology or psychiatry. To quote Freud 'In itself every science is one-sided. It must be so since it restricts itself to particular objects, points of view and methods'. (Vol. 20 Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. p. 321) Similarly The Religion of Scientology has it's own self-contained technology and methods which should not be confused with other technology and methods. Sir John Foster appreciates this fact — In his recommendations regarding setting up a psychotherapy council he says 'The subject is young and still developing rapidly. Clearly, the new profession's rules will need to be more flexible than those adopted at the present time by, say, lawyers and accountants. Had the medical profession been able to exclude osteopaths from practice in the past, much suffering might have gone unrelieved. It is therefore important to ensure that progress is not inhibited by the kind of conservatism which has, on occasions, tended to afflict some of the older professional bodies, particularly in the medical field. The best method of avoiding this pitfall is to provide for the appointment to the Council of a number of radically-minded laymen who will act as a leaven.' (Enquiry into the Practice and Effects of Scientology, Report by Sir John G. Foster. p. 180).

   For the above reasons, the Church respectfully suggests that Dr. Nelson's report of his examination of and conclusion concerning the E-Meter, though couched in terms of an appeal to Science, lacks a scientific basis and is irrelevant in that it is written from the viewpoint of a context in which the E-Meter is not designed to function and his report consists merely of his personal opinion."

<Prior  |  Table of Contents  |  Next>

Report of the Commission of Enquiry into Scientology for 1972
Republic of South Africa