On Saturday 28th (in two days) I will hold a talk at a seminar arranged by one of the larger student societies in Norway.
I will take the opportunity to ask for your opinions about what I should cover – subjects and angles. And as usual, I will not let the opportunity pass to ask the smartest people I know – the readers of this blog. Obviously, I do as I feel like, but you may have some ideas that could make for inspiration.
Short notice… but: shoot.
Geir Isene - uncut 
It would be helpful to know why you were asked to speak,
and what you were asked to speak about?
Dio
I was asked to participate – and I accepted without much thought (as I usually do).
For a better insight, try this link (Google translated – I love the way it translates my name…)
The movie, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is a dense puzzle of anxiety, paranoia, and espionage that director Tomas Alfredson pieces together with utmost skill. It reminded me of Scientology management characters.
I actual ask the same as Dio
Pros & Cons of the Hubbard’s “Admin Tech” is something there is very little readily available material on in the public domain.
Two things.
The cycle of action in terms of create, create-create-create…no creation.
And TR 0/confront, as a basic and high-truth principle that exists not only in Scientology.
Another suggestion occurred to me after reading the Google translate link (thanks!): Scientology Introduction to Ethics book, how you perceived & interpreted that material originally versus. how you see it nowadays.
Oh my 😉
Along with ethics/admin, you could also give a brief summary of tech (“personal counselling”) – from the perspective of past and present, i.e. as things were in the beginning years and as they are now. And then (another “Oh, my”, possibly) would be your insights into the future of Scn. I don’t think you’ve ever really gone into that much.
The future of Scientology… hmm… interesting topic. Yes.
No sir, “Oh my” (and indebted thanks) is what follows if/when you are possibly kind enough to make your presentation notes/materials available afterwards 😉
No notes. I will wing it. Pure and simple. But I will tell you all how it went afterwards 😉
Good enough, thanks Isene for time to educate both the students and us.
One thing you should tell them is that there is good and bad scientology.
There is a right way and wrong way to do everything including scientology.
Tell them that scn was a very good thing which started in the 50s and went bad and corrupt in the 70s and thereafter.
Make sure to tell them about the freezone.
Tell them what it is in lay language.
Tell them it begins with Dianetics which is a trauma therapy or and PTSD therapy.
Tell them it is the only truly effective trauma therapy in the world.
Tell them it has saved many lives, where everything else has failed.
Tell them it is a procedure to remove the issues that are blocking or preventing a person from succeeding in any area of life.
Tell them it is a step by step science of how to increase and maximize the use of the mind from the average 10 or 15% to 100%.
It is the science of maximizing human potential.
Tell them it does not work well without the person having a good foundation and understanding of the bible and other fundamental religions. The more the better.
Tell them it is a sort of a post secondary religion that the truth seeker can advance to after learning as much as he or she can from the fundamental religions.
It is like a university education that a person can do after they graduate from grade school and high school. But in this case it is about religion and philosophy.
Tell them a bit about Hubbard and how he developed it by reading and researching all ( or a lot of) the available data resolving the problems of the mind and spirit that was written prior to the 30s and 40s.
Tell them it is actually the reverse of hypnosis. Hypnosis puts programs into the mind and Dianetics takes programs out of the mind.
Tell them that no programs are good in the mind. Tell them that the mind works best without any programs. It is everything it needs to be naturally.
Tell them that as the story goes, Hubbard ran away from home when he was 12 or 13 yrs old and hitched a ride on a merchant navy ship to India and spent two yrs studying with the Indian spiritual masters. Then returned home and his father sent him back to school.
I am not certain that the last foregoing paragraph is true or not, but that is the way I read it somewhere. That should be verified if possible. Maybe someone else knows better.
It is a interesting tidbit if it is true.
Dio
Good post, Dio.
You should tell them that Hubbard brought Scientology to this planet as an experiment. He knew, this being a prison planet where all the geniuses, as well as all the criminally insane, were sent from the other planets that make up the Galactic Federation, of which Teegegack (Earth) is a part.
You should tell them that if Scientology was ever going to work, it would have to work here to free mankind and then from here, expanding on out to free this Sector of the Universe.
You should wear a silver space suit with sparkly tights, a silver helmut, and spats.
For a good audio visual presentation, South Park has an excellent animated version of the Scientology Cosmology Story, just to orient them and take them up out of confusion after so many lifetimes here on this prison planet.
That’s for starters. I’ll keep thinking of more and I’ll get back to you.
Also, bring the PAIN AND SEX HCOB with you because many of these kids will have been dramatizing this implant for most of their lives, and this HCOB will help to get their ethics in as human beings on planet Earth.
dammmm Alanzo. You sure don’t beat around the bush…
The first sentence on the website is probably the first thing to use False Data Stripping on:
Church of Scientology is one of the fastest growing faiths in the world and is progressing well in Norway.
Be sure to word clear them on the FDS procedure first, and run it 100% standardly with no verbal tech whatsoever.
Geir, if Mr. Asbjørn Dyrendal focuses on basic scientology philosophy it will be easy for you and may be the norwegian org will have good promotion from you. But if this professor of religious science at NTNU (“Norwegian University of Science and Technology”) focuses on the matterials found in the Andreas Hendal Lund web site, it will be needed a good explanation of the scientology cosmology story ( it could be labeled as just “a kind of exorcism” ) or why scientologists are called ” clams ” by his critics.
Dio’s post above is so funny that I have to add to it for my next set of suggestions:
One thing you should tell them is that there is good and bad scientology.
Yes, and be sure to say that any bad Scientology is only bad because it has not been applied correctly, or because it was transcribed by transcriptionists.
There is a right way and wrong way to do everything including scientology.
Yes, and tell them that if Scientology does not work, then it was done wrong. And if it works, then it was done right.
Tell them that scn was a very good thing which started in the 50s and went bad and corrupt in the 70s and thereafter.
Yes, but say that the reason it went bad and corrupt is not because of anything in Scientology, or anything having to do with Hubbard, but because Scientologists are too evil and too stupid to understand it and to apply it correctly.
Make sure to tell them about the freezone.
Yes, and how much more sane they are than other Scientologists.
Tell them what it is in lay language.
Yes, use a picture book if you can. Civilization has been going downhill ever since the 1950’s with the release of LSD and food additives.
Tell them it begins with Dianetics which is a trauma therapy or a PTSD therapy.
Yes, and tell them that’s why so many psychs are using it now with all the wars going on.
Tell them it is the only truly effective trauma therapy in the world.
Exactly. No need for any evidence whatsoever to support this statement, just blurt it out loudly and look confident as you say it. They should applaud you if you do this correctly.
Tell them it has saved many lives, where everything else has failed.
Yes. Many lives. Don’t get too specific here. We don’t need to get bogged down in complex details.
Tell them it is a procedure to remove the issues that are blocking or preventing a person from succeeding in any area of life.
Any area, yes. Make it big and general and sweeping. Continually put their attention on infinity, they will follow right with you.
Tell them it is a step by step science of how to increase and maximize the use of the mind from the average 10 or 15% to 100%.
Yes, and don’t worry at all that this “5%-10% use of the mind” is a complete wive’s tale from the 1950’s. Ignore any actual science that has been done in the area of neuroscience, for instance, or even any other real science for the last 60 years. Just emphasize that Dianetics and Scientology are science.
It is the science of maximizing human potential.
Yes. That statement says absolutely nothing, and you will need many statements like this in order glaze over these people’s critical faculties.
Tell them it does not work well without the person having a good foundation and understanding of the bible and other fundamental religions. The more the better.
Yes. It isn’t a real religion. It is just made to look like one.
Tell them it is a sort of a post secondary religion that the truth seeker can advance to after learning as much as he or she can from the fundamental religions.
Yes, position it ABOVE christianity, buddhism, and islam, etc. Emphasize the ADVANCE upward with an upward motion of your hands.
It is like a university education that a person can do after they graduate from grade school and high school. But in this case it is about religion and philosophy.
Perfect positioning tech. It doesn’t matter that it is not these things at all. It just needs to be made to seem that way in your audiences’ minds.
Tell them a bit about Hubbard and how he developed it by reading and researching all ( or a lot of) the available data resolving the problems of the mind and spirit that was written prior to the 30s and 40s.
Leave out the “a lot of” part. Say he read and researched ALL of the available data resolving the problems of the mind and spirit. If anyone asks for examples, change the subject, or if they give you one say “Yes, that was included” and move on.
Tell them it is actually the reverse of hypnosis. Hypnosis puts programs into the mind and Dianetics takes programs out of the mind.
Right. And Dianetics would never put any program into the mind, it would only take them out. And that’s why you see so many Scientologists saying and feeling and thinking the exact same things as every other Scientologist all around the world with regard to the mind and spirit.
Tell them that no programs are good in the mind. Tell them that the mind works best without any programs. It is everything it needs to be naturally.
Yes and Dianetics holds all the programs that are natural to the mind.
Tell them that as the story goes, Hubbard ran away from home when he was 12 or 13 yrs old and hitched a ride on a merchant navy ship to India and spent two yrs studying with the Indian spiritual masters. Then returned home and his father sent him back to school.
I am not certain that the last foregoing paragraph is true or not, but that is the way I read it somewhere. That should be verified if possible. Maybe someone else knows better.
Neither am I, but what the hell. Norwegians will swallow anything without question, just like Scientologists do.
This is great advice Geir. They will not laugh at you if you make these statements boldly and confidently like LRH did and are wearing your space helmet and your sparkly tights.
Geir, I think you should get a collar and a leash for Alanzo, and take him with you as a living example of……. use your imagination here……
A Sea Org Member?
Yes, let’s gang-recruit Al for the Sea Org!
That’s his motivator for next life. 😀
… or it could have been his motivator for *this* life.
Oh ma Gawd …he came back!!!
Round 2 in his billion year contract 🙂
That’s right, and at the rate of his natter he is going to have to fulfill the whole billion years contract, mimimumly.
I keep saying I’m not going to egg him on any more but it’s so hard to resist! At least I’ve been equally fair picking on both him and Dio.
I knew immediately when I saw the word Scientology in the opening post title that we were going to be off to the races. So predictable, all of us. (I”m laughing) 😀
Thanks for your help Valkov……
But evidently Alonzo is not tame enough or sane enough to be controlled only by a leash. He needs a cage, ankle chains and a muzzle.
( I got the picture of a farmer in the old days, hauling his pig to market in a wooden crate cage on his wagon being pulled with a team of horses. But instead Alonzo was in the cage and Geir was the farmer driving his team of horses to the presentation. )
I struggled all night with his defecation and trampling.
I made the proverbial mistake of throwing pearls in front of swine.
The following is copied from the net:
The Principle: Casting Pearls Before Swine
“Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.” (Matthew 7:6).
Of course, these words of Jesus are allegorical. I doubt that any were literally casting pearls before swine. The meaning is pretty simple to figure out; “Do not persist in offering what is sacred or of value to those who have no appreciation for it, because your gift will not only become contaminated and be despised, your generous efforts could also be rebuffed and perhaps even openly attacked.”
The “dogs” and “swine” here stand for the unappreciative and worldly; unappreciative and uncaring men and women who belittle the value of what is offered to them. “That which is holy” would be the meat offered in sacrifice to God. A dog could care less whether it came from the altar or the garbage. The swine have no appreciation for either the beauty nor the value of the pearls under their feet.
Your life, time, energy, opportunities and abilities are God’s pearls. They’re His! You and I are merely His stewards overseeing His possessions (1 Corinthians 6:19,20; 4:1,2; 1 Peter 4:8-11). We must show discernment as to what use we make of God’s possessions. It is possible to waste them either by using them when we should not as well as not using them when we should.
I see it the other way around. Alanzo is casting the pearls. 🙂
I mean it.
.
Diogenese, who decides who’s view point has more value, importance?
Diogenes –
I’m sorry if you were insulted by what I wrote.
You might not understand this, but my viewpoint is that Scientology deserves to be picked apart publicly. In fact, I believe it is every citizen’s duty in a free society to do this to Scientology.
I also believe that it is the duty of true Scientologists to examine and expose and deconstruct every single teaching from LRH. LRH himself at one time even said so. The Internet has allowed Scientologists to do this, and there is no reason they should not.
What you wrote about LRH and Scientology might truly be your beliefs. But because Scientology is an authoritarian, anti-rights, abusive, totalitarian space cult, I believe I have a duty to write something in response to your religious beliefs about Scientology.
Again, I’m sorry you were insulted by what I wrote, but as a citizen of a free society, I have a duty to write it.
Alanzo
Alanzo, I appreciate and approve of this wonderfully detached approach of yours. I am working toward this state myself.
.
Alonzo,
I accept your apology….and thank you.
But………for your information…… to get one thing straight…….
…….I do not believe anything.
Believing in something means you do not know the truth about the subject at hand.
A belief is what people revert to in the absence of facts.
The function of believing is the raising of an opinion, a hearsay or a fabrication to the level of a truth or fact without proof.
Therefore the function of believing is intellectual dishonesty, or intellectual incompetence.
The function of believing is a function of those very low on the scale of intellectual evolution.
Believing is nothing more than an inadvertent confession of ignorance.
People sufficiently high on the scale of intellectual evolution know how to know.
That is one of the main purposes of scientology, but that specific knowledge is laced cryptically and esoterically into the chatter.
There fore the truth is not and cannot be determined by beliefs, nor by opinions.
Now that being said, I made my post based on the most superior computations, ( an impartial evaluation ) as I learned to do from Hubbard’s article: How to study a science, and other related data.
Next:
Your post was not a critique, it was a defecation and trampling of what I said.
Neither was your post an opinion or a belief.
Alonzo, your words:
“What you wrote about LRH and Scientology might truly be your beliefs. But because Scientology is an authoritarian, anti-rights, abusive, totalitarian space cult, I believe I have a duty to write something in response to your religious beliefs about Scientology.”
End…
In the over 14 yrs, I have studied scientology, I can’t really say, that I have seen what you describe as:
authoritarian, anti-rights, abusive, totalitarian space cult,
The people in the church are that way, but the basic or real data is not so.
So in a best case scenario in this case, you are shooting at the wrong target or barking up the wrong tree.
It is my summation that scn is purposely set up that way, to be a trap for fools, and a deterrent for others.
All religions tend to be traps for fools and gold mines of knowledge, wisdom and true freedom for the wise.
The real truths are written allegorically in scientology, and the so it is with much of the bible, and likely other religions.
Scientology is a complex, sophisticated, cryptic and esoteric allegory, where the real truth is hidden and protected by many traps, layers of lies and deceptions.
Lunatics will guard it and many will read and study it and few there be that will find the real truth.
If your words do not promote love, intelligence and the like, do not speak, so as to not foul the airwaves.
Your words are about as pleasing and intelligent as a big, loud, stinky passing of wind at the kitchen table, on Sunday where the preacher, his wife and family are the guests of honor for dinner.
Ask that empty space in front of you to teach you the truth in all things, and to give you wisdom and understanding. That empty space is alive and well. Ask non ceasingly.
When you are ready the teacher will appear.
Dio.
Dio, you said, “I do not believe anything. Believing in something means you do not know the truth about the subject at hand. A belief is what people revert to in the absence of facts…”
Since you talk about God, my question to you is, “Do you believe in God, or is God a factual entity for you?” And if God is a factual entity for you, how do you differentiate God from the physical universe, and from the feeling of amazement, bliss, love, etc., that various phenomena in the physical universe inspire.
.
Correction / clarification on my reply to Alonzo,
Alonzo: Your commentary was also or more accurately or in other words, a mockery of what I said in response to Geir’s request for suggestions on what to say in his speech, not a critique.
I read somewhere that Hubbard said that the freedom of speech does not include ___________________, I do not recall the words Hubbard used. ( if anyone remembers those words, please enlighten me.)
But I say the freedom of speech does not include the right to irresponsible speech, lies, defamation of character, and the like.
Freedom can only be given to the responsible, the sane, the intelligent.
Nothing is absolute. There is no such thing as unlimited freedom.
Contrary to the vanity and mindless whims of popular culture, there is such thing as right and wrong.
Not knowing the difference between right and wrong is called insanity.
Dio
Diogenese, “Freedom can only be given to the responsible, the sane, the intelligent.”
May I ask a very silly question: who would be those beings who could decide chooses elects selects where are the boundaries of responsibility, sane and what is intelligent means? Who would choose those persons? That would happen By agreements of course, so free speech would not be allowed, permissible, tolerated?
“Off with his head!”
We all have different realities how we view the universe our own creation… and not one view point is better than the other or hold more value, they are simply different and nothing more..
Elizabeth,
Since you contested my facts……
This is the way it is:
To be honest and give an unbiased evaluation….
You have to take ” a bird on the wire” viewpoint of society over a few hundred yrs, especially the last few hundred yrs.
(Actually you have to get further away than ” a bird on a wire” position. You have to get on the space station to get a maximum viewpoint.
You have to get rid of all opinions and beliefs.
You should also learn your scientology better.
You have to learn and practice scientific factual thinking, free of emotions opinions, beliefs, and other such interference and aberrating factors.
Next:
Not only is the truth not determined by authority as Hubbard said, the truth is also not determined by who wins an argument or by majority vote or public opinion polls, blog discussions, or ideology, or beliefs or opinions.
The truth ( the facts) are determined by how well a datum has been evaluated.
Or in other words, any idea or datum is only as good as it works.
In this dissertation, I will base my viewpoint ( my position ) on scientific thinking and how well a datum works.
Democracy is proving itself to be not workable as we watch the world deteriorate in riots of anarchists and other lower forms of life.
Based on evidence: Democracy cannot be given to the insane, the irresponsible, lunatics, the improperly educated or uneducated for they are destroying the world and will destroy the world if allowed to continue.
Way back when the leaders of society used to chop people’s heads off for misdeeds or what ever reason, it culled society and produced a relatively sane society for a few years in the 1800s and 1900s.
At least here in Canada we had a very good ( or above average ) stable sane society in the first part of the 1900s.
Then some weak minded individuals who escaped execution and infiltrated their way into positions of influence, decided to give rights to the insane, the retarded and the like, that caused the insane, retarded and irresponsible to breed and multiply, so now we have a society were the majority are retarded lunatics, misfits, drug addicts, insane and other lower forms of life and degraded forms of life.
That, evidently, in hind sight was a bad mistake.
Society has to start learning from it’s mistakes.
This is not a matter of opinion or beliefs, as I said such mental activity is low on the scale of intellectual evolution.
You have to use good reason, a very high level of the right kind of education and scientific thinking.
My conclusion is based on an impartial, factual, objective evaluation, or scientific thinking.
Evidently we have to go back to a dictatorship and I will be the dictator.
Also not everyone is a human being. There are a large percentage of the population in every country who are not human. They look and act like humans, but they are not human. They are imposters. Just look at Alonzo for example.
The president of some African country ( his name could of been Mugabe or something like that) described them well, he said they are just biological mass and have to be eradicated.
The evidence indicates that he is likely right.
This world is in dire need of an extensive culling.
(BTW: I suspect the the chemtrails are just that; it a process to cull the lunatics. Only the insane, the retarded, the lunatics and other lower forms of life will be effected and culled by the chemicals. And it is probably done by extra terrestrial craft. )
In my extensive research, all evidence indicates that this world has been populated and destroyed many times over the billions of yrs.
Supporting example: According to what I heard, pieces of plastic, bricks and stainless steel were found in coal deposits a half mile underground.
Other evidence gives further proof that what we think is true is not true.
IN fact it is my evaluation and conclusion that almost everything everyone knows is wrong.
Mark Twain said: history is a Mississippi of lies.
So as a pre-emptive measure I want to save the world from destruction by lunatics, human imposters and other lower forms of life.
Some body has to grab the bull by the horns and save the world.
My evidence also indicates that what we think is going on in this world is not what is going on. We are likely just some creatures in somebody’s terrarium. All commotion is just done for show, to give reality to the game.
Any rebuttal based on opinions, beliefs and other soft minded arbitraries are not allowed.
Any disagreement with my factual viewpoints are also not allowed.
I now have to get to work and save the world.
: )
A silly question begets a silly answer,
Dio
Was all of that a joke or is there some truth to your having a superior and arrogant attitude that looks down on almost everybody and lacks any trace of empathy?
Miraldi,
On one hand:
You did not adhere to my orders that no replies containing, beliefs and other soft minded arbitraries were allowed.
Soft minded arbitraries include empathy ( emotion is an aberrating, arbitrary factor) .
And no disagreements with my facts were allowed either.
Two violations there. 🙂
On the other hand, according to Elizabeth:
(and many others hold the same viewpoint which amounts to: there is no right or wrong, just different viewpoints )
Quote from Elizabeth:
We all have different realities how we view the universe our own creation… and not one view point is better than the other or hold more value, they are simply different and nothing more..
End of quote…
If Elizabeth and others of the same operating data, are correct, then I am correct too, just simply different and nothing more.
🙂
Dio
Well Dio, I was going to write a post to both you and Alonzo and tell you guys you better be careful because I don’t think Vinaire was ever as insulting as the two of you have been to each other and he was warned about it. But I have to give you credit on reply to me for your sense of humor and for making a good point – about different realities.
I don’t know if Alonzo or Elizabeth are going to let you off the hook as easily, though. 😉
Dio, I was on the Phone with Marildi when opened your email to me and started to read it and I was laughing so hard Marildi had to finish the reading.
To me your reality it is just that, your creation your universe nothing more nothing less. Good for a laugh.
But In my recent wondering I read the requirements conditions [ illness] for the membership of the KKK and I realized your way of thinking-believing fits the bill and I recommend that you should apply, please don’t miss that great opportunity.
Since you said you live in Canada, me knowing that now caused a problem for me, I need to move out of here.
Partner, this here is a big country but not big enough for both of us! 🙂 Hehehe… 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂
Elizabeth and Miraldi,
Since it appears that both of you are of a similar position…….( that I am an irrational, ruthless, heartless, extremist madman) …..I will again address the flaws in your thinking with factual scientific evaluation…
I will paste part of Elizabeth’s post here for reference and a bit of dissection and handling:
E. But In my recent wondering I read the requirements conditions [ illness] for the membership of the KKK and I realized your way of thinking-believing
D. The concern here is you accused me of the crime of believing.
You have to go back and read about the facts of believing in my earlier post, on believing. Please understand that …………
I repost:
…….I do not believe anything.
Believing in something means you do not know the truth about the subject at hand.
A belief is what people revert to in the absence of facts.
The function of believing is the raising of an opinion, a hearsay or a fabrication to the level of a truth or fact without proof.
Therefore the function of believing is intellectual dishonesty, or intellectual incompetence.
The function of believing is a function of those very low on the scale of intellectual evolution.
Believing is nothing more than an inadvertent confession of ignorance.
People sufficiently high on the scale of intellectual evolution know how to know.
That is one of the main purposes of scientology, but that specific knowledge is laced cryptically and esoterically into the chatter.
There fore the truth is not and cannot be determined by beliefs, nor by opinions.
End of my words from that previous post.
I hope that explains why and helps you understand the problem with believing and why I do not believe anything.
To me something is either true and could be proven to be true, or not true or I am not sure.
Or I know, or don’t know or not sure.
Believing means that you do not know.
Scientology has taught me how to know.
Believing and beliefs is the biggest problem facing humanity today.
Now that being said….. let me ask you two a question:
Which is the lessor of two evils??????
If we let the insane, the lunatics, and other lower forms of life take over the planet and blow it to smitherines, so earth will become another asteroid belt….
or if I become the dictator and take responsibility ( the highest degree of responsibility is responsibility for everything) and do a serious culling to save the planet?
As far as I can see that is the only two choices we have, other than the second coming of Jesus, which I think he has come and gone a few times, ( and everyone missed it) and he has given up on saving mankind.
This decision cannot be made by bleeding hearts, nor the feeble minded.
Someone who has a good sense of right and wrong has to make the tough decisions and tough decision makers do not win popularity contests from the fickle majority.
In this imperfect world, our only option is often the lessor of two evils.
So again, which of the two options above, is the lessor of two evils?
Your loving, intelligent, responsible free spirit,
Dio
Dear loving, intelligent, responsible free spirit (I like that ;)),
Are you still hobby horsing your MU on the word “believe”? Yes, that’s right – you are condescendingly hobby horsing something that shows you up to have a plain old, garden variety MU, just like any peon in existence might have. (I’m on a roll, Dio, watch out. :D)
Now, before we can have an intelligent discussion you will have to clear that up. Take good note of the definition: “to have confidence in the truth of something”. Then, if you still think that particular definition doesn’t apply to you as much as anybody else and you still cannot see how it is being used that way just as confidently by us, you might need to use it in some more sentences, etc. Let me know when you are ready then to have an intelligent discussion. 😛
Marildi, You are lying to your teeth when you write that to Dio. I never taken you for the lier, what’s with you?
“Dear loving, intelligent, responsible free spirit”,
Shhhh, Elizabeth. I’m softening him up for the kill. 😉
Dio, do give up man, between Marildi and I we can pick you so clean by the time we finish with you nothing would left for the vultures.
Now on different note, I truly thank you for the communication it has been great fun for us at your expense. [the telephone line between here and San F. are down, burned out..]
Be well, wish you the very best. Elizabeth.
You think he’s given up already? Hope not. He has a great sense of humor for an irrational, ruthless, heartless, extremist madman.
(Quoting HIM. He’s funny! :D)
well, he might offer something more, so lets wait and see..he is a true delight….
I must say this is a wonderful universe, there is so much one can experience, the variety of games are infinite, what i mean by that one game has infinite levels, how one can look at that game and experience it, every time in new unit of time.
Dear Elizabeth and Miraldi,
First:
Re: the word “belief”
I have reviewed about 6 or 7 dictionaries to get certainty on the word belief.
The only correct one based on reason and logic is the Random house dictionary, which has a few wrong definitions and one right definition.
The right definition of the word belief is: to accept something as true without absolute proof.
When you really honestly think about it, it is the only definition that can be correct.
The word belief is the most misused and misunderstood word in language.
Just watch people when they use the word. SEE what they really mean when they use the word believe.
For example someone says: I can’t believe that happened?
What they actually really mean is: “I can’t imagine that happened.”.
Another example President Bush said: We believe Iraq had WMD, so we had to use pre-emptive measures and invade them.
What he really meant was that they thought Iraq had WMD.
He did not know for certain that they had WMD.
Use those examples as reference the next time you use or hear someone else use the word believe.
There are many other ways people use the word. Just evaluate it.
Next: In regards to the tone scale:
You have to remember Hubbard’s qualifier of all rules and data.
That is: When the rules do not work, the hell with the rules and go with what works.
That means that any idea is only as good as it works.
Your loving, intelligent, responsible, rational, reasonable, sane free spirit.
You see, I am even getting better than I was yesterday.
Got to go a workshop on natural health detoxification, down town, now.
Dio
Dio, even if all the dictionaries in the world are wrong and you are the only one who knows the one right definition of “believe”, the fact still remains that people do use the word in several different ways. And I’m afraid you are obliged to determine how they are using it, by the context. (Didn’t you ever learn how to clear a word?)
As for tone level, here’s a link for Science of Survival, THE book on the subject: http://www.e-reading.by/bookreader.php/133980/Science_of_Survival._Prediction_of_Human_Behavior.pdfments among people as t their meanings.
Tone levels are much more than a tool – they are a phenomenon of existence that can be experienced. And I BELIEVE (i.e. I am strongly convinced of the truth 😉 that you have to know the rules of the tone scale pretty darn well before you can toss them and be free of them – and before you can fully be your true self, a loving, intelligent, responsible, rational, reasonable, sane free spirit. 🙂
Marildi:
“And I BELIEVE (i.e. I am strongly convinced of the truth 😉 that you have to know the rules of the tone scale pretty darn well before you can toss them and be free of them – and before you can fully be your true self, a loving, intelligent, responsible, rational, reasonable, sane free spirit.”
By the time one tosses the tone scale because of the understanding what is tone scale means, by than one also tosses or as-is all the meanings what is “true self, a loving, intelligent, responsible, rational, reasonable, sane free spirit.” All that goes down in the drain since those too are just that thoughts agreement considerations ‘What is loving, intelligent, reasonable sane means. The free spirit has no thoughts, considerations and agreement therefore any rules. which to go by. Being free means void of any of those.
When one is only experiencing the NOW that moment in creation in that creation do not contain any consideration, agreements etc. those are only addition. Example: think of a flower, did you seeit? that was your creation and experience at the same time and that was in NOW. It did not contain anything else. That was created by FREE WILL in NOW.
I meant that you have to know the rules of the tone scale before you can fully be your true self, a loving, intelligent, responsible, rational, reasonable, sane, free spirit – only after that can you toss them all.
yes, I know the rules and all that goes with knowing: the rest of the considerations which have brought them into existence, i had to know in order to as-is. wish you were here, very much so..
Wish I were too! 🙂
Dio you too are invited and we smoke the peace pipe in the garden and have tea and hot sconces with raspberry jam and cream. Alanzo too is welcome!
Elizabeth,
Your words…..
Dio you too are invited and we smoke the peace pipe in the garden and have tea and hot sconces with raspberry jam and cream. Alanzo too is welcome!
D. If Alonzo will come by and pick me up with his space ship, I will come for scones and jam.
And no, I do not have a green house.
Dio
Miraldi,
Your words:
“I am strongly convinced of the truth.”
Convinced of the truth is still an intellectually dishonest statement or operating datum.
There are still a few screws loose there.
There is still an element of unknowing, ambiguity there, or doubt in convincing.
Yes, most dictionaries are full of mistakes.
That is why I have seven different dictionaries to properly word clear a word.
I use reason, evaluation and logic and compare and test data to the known universe.
Nothing is true unless it can be proven to be true.
As Hubbard said, or in alignment with what he said:
The truth is not determined by authority .
I also add that the truth is not determined by convincing.
It is also not determined by beliefs,
nor opinions,
nor by argument,
nor by majority vote,
or by polls,
or by agreement,
or by any other such arbitraries.
The truth is the truth.
The truth, the honest truth will set you free.
Only the truth will solve your problems properly.
Beliefs will not set you free. Beliefs are traps.
Beliefs will not necessarily solve your problems properly.
They may appear to solve your problems, but not solve your problems.
Beliefs are an inadvertent confession of not knowing.
An inadvertent confession of ignorance.
Beliefs inherently include/contain an element of doubt or uncertainty.
What is truth?
My definition is: The truth is nothing more than the right answer to any problem.
Generally speaking, every problem has a truth, many partial truths, many almost truths, many sometimes truths, many false truths and many lies.
The worst lies are the ones almost true. The more truth there is on a cognitive set up, the more the truth acts as a glue to hold the lie in place, which thereafter goes uninspected and often defended to death.
Cheers,
Dio
Dio, this is just semantics, IMO. People – including you – can become convinced of the truth BECAUSE, as you say, they “use reason, evaluation and logic and compare and test data to the known universe”. And just because they have used the word “believe” to indicate that they have become convinced doesn’t necessarily mean they haven’t come to that in as valid a way as you have. You can’t assume what you are assuming just because they used the word “believe”. I’ve observed several instances where people have used that word and you assumed they meant that one definition will accept. And I doubt that anybody has had any disagreement with that definition as not necessarily being valid.
But I liked some of the things you said about truth. Didn’t understand this one: “The more truth there is on a cognitive set up, the more the truth acts as a glue to hold the lie in place, which thereafter goes uninspected and often defended to death.” Cheers back. 🙂
Miraldi
Re: cognitive set up…………….
Your words:
But I liked some of the things you said about truth. Didn’t understand this one: “The more truth there is on a cognitive set up, the more the truth acts as a glue to hold the lie in place, which thereafter goes uninspected and often defended to death.” Cheers back. 🙂
A cognitive set up means a mind construction. One that is constructed to deceive. Or even unintentionally contains a lie.
For example: I could fabricate a story containing mostly truth, but also contains a lie, that you will likely never figure out what the lie is, or never even consider there is a lie in it.
That is a cognitive set up.
But my cognitive set up may not stick with you and you may argue it, but argue the wrong points, and I will argue back, and even defend it to death.
I could argue the point just to play mind games with and jerk your chain or for more serious reasons, like religious or even political issues.
The facts would only be known or detectable by someone who is an expert in the subject.
Also there is cognitive set ups, that get passed on in society or even from generation to generation.
Religion contains them too, and maybe especially so.
For example: the Muslim women have to wear hijabs and burkas.
From what I understand that order is not contained in the Quran.
But it is defended as part of the religion, and Allah help any Muslim woman who refuses to wear it.
That may not be the best example, but I would classify it as a cognitive set up, which contains a lie, which the whole construct is defended with fervor to death.
Anyways, I think you should get the idea.
Dio
Okay, thanks. I get the general idea – enough to give me a somatic. Seriously, that kind of thing can leave me feeling…numb. I used to feel that way with the comments of certain critics (who shall remain nameless :D) until I learned how to handle them with one fell swoop by naming the obvious logical fallacy. 😉
Marildi…What is “The more truth there is on a cognitive set up, the more the truth acts as a glue to hold the lie in place, which thereafter goes uninspected and often defended to death.” DO I have a MU on that sentence? truth is a glue? So my cognitions are glue? Truth is not energy based thoughts. If any thought contains any mass than that is not a truth but just a different view point which IS Labeled as truth.
Right, talking about truth here doesn’t mean the ultimate high-level truth that you are talking about. But let’s take a particular philosophy, for example – maybe there is so much truth to it that you are attracted and you stick to it like it’s a glue. But you may not see the lies that are hidden in there too The more truth, the easier to hide the lies. OR you may feel something is wrong but you can’t put your finger on what. And someone could give you all kinds of arguments that are very logical, but they are leaving out the hidden stuff that would take an expert to see so you don’t see it. That’s the idea I get.
Thand i got it..
Cool, Lizzy poo. Remember when Vinnie called you that? And one time he and I pretended that we were in love – he can be fun! I hope he’s doing some serious soul-searching…well, make that consideration-looking. 😉
p.s. It’s the “cognitive setup” part I wasn’t sure of. Do you simply mean the aberrations in the mind?
Diogenes-
Yes, there is a decidedly genocidal strain to Scientology.
It began with The Basics, Science of Survival, where anyone lower than 2.0 on the tone scale should have “no civil rights of any kind”, and the wholesale slaughter of human beings by a particular Venezuelan dictator as a way to handle problems in society is looked upon with longing.
It continued from there.
Thank you for revealing the darker side of Scientology.
Please keep up the good work.
Alanzo
Here’s an excerpt just for you, Alanzo, from Science of Survival, chapter on “Method Used By Subject To Handle Others”. Read this and then decide which of the two ways of handling people from 2.0 down LRH is advocating – to raise them on the tone scale by processing or to dispose of them. Hint: all the rest of the book is about how to do processing. 😉
“The reasonable man quite ordinarily overlooks the fact that people from 2.0 down have no traffic with reason and cannot be reasoned with as one would reason with a 3.0. There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the tone scale, neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the tone scale by un-enturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow. Adders are safe bedmates compared to people on the lower bands of the tone scale. Not all the beauty nor the handsomeness nor artificial social value nor property can atone for the vicious damage such people do to sane men and women. The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals occupying the lower bands of the tone scale from the social order would result in an almost instant rise in the cultural tone and would interrupt the dwindling spiral into which any society may have entered.
It is not necessary to produce a world of clears in order to have a reasonable and worthwhile social order; it is only necessary to delete those individuals who range from 2.0 down, either by processing them enough to get their tone level above the 2.0 line –
a task which, indeed, is not very great, since the amount of processing in many cases might be under fifty hours, although it might also in others be in excess of two hundred — or simply quarantining them from the society. A Venezuelan dictator once decided to stop leprosy. He saw that most lepers in his country were also beggars. By the simple expedient of collecting and destroying all the beggars in Venezuela an end was put to leprosy in that country. The methods used by individuals on various levels of the tone scale in order to live with their fellows are as follows…”
I didn’t see the outpoints in that passage of writing by LRH either when I was a Scientologist, but it is still astounding to me whenever someone can not/will not see the outpoints here.
First of all, there are so many unexamined assumptions involved in taking emotions and plotting them on a scale, and then assigning various numerical values to them based on “survival value”.
But to then take people who the observer in many cases does not know at all, and to assign a value to the person based on this completely arbitrary scale is really going out to left field. And then to make the statement that these people, based on this scale, do not deserve any civil rights of any kind? To say that deleting them from the society would produce a rise of the society on the scale?
This is just insane.
How exactly would this work? Tone Scale police who hauled in anyone who was crying? Children reporting the emotional states of their parents? That would raise the tone level of society?
This writing is so divorced from reality, so completely fascist and alien to the concepts of rights and citizenship that I am completely surprised that you are even copying it here, Marildi.
Really. Take a step back and examine this from a real world perspective. What if Barak Obama started implementing Hubbard’s ideas here, exactly as written. Do you really believe this would cause a better society?
Really. I am asking you seriously.
Alonzo,
Your words,
. What if Barak Obama started implementing Hubbard’s ideas here, exactly as written. Do you really believe this would cause a better society?
There is a couple of perspectives on this matter.
Yes, it would certainly cause a better society.
That genocidal practice has been tried in limited ways in the USA and Canada even.
There was a news item on CNN a few weeks ago, on that issue.
The practice was tried in Alberta, Canada too, some time ago.
Actually it was to sterilize the lunatics, etc..
The argument has been put fwd by our PM Trudeau, back in the 70s, that the government has no business in the nations bedrooms.
But recently some city councilor evaluated that idea and said that if the government is responsible for the products that come out of the bedroom, ( in the form of welfare and disability and health care) then it has business in the nations bedrooms.
Anyways that is a bit off on a tangent.
On the other hand, it is also true that the truth cannot be told on this planet in many cases.
As in: it is not safe to make the truth known, in certain cases.
So just because an idea is true and needed, does not mean it is workable and should be or must be applied.
Another example; Just because I know it is an absolute truth that you need the living daylights beat out of you, to pound some sense into you, does not mean that I can do it.
LOL
Your loving, responsible, intelligent, sane, all knowing, full OT, free spirit, wonderful, ET friend.
Dio
“Just because I know it is an absolute truth that you need the living daylights beat out of you, to pound some sense into you, does not mean that I can do it.”
LOL 😀
Gosh, Al, you keep reinforcing my viewpoint that critics are generally full of MUs. I guess it takes a less literal intelligence to duplicate that passage (sigh).
And you’ve reminded me now of your other confused idea (i.e. MU based):
“It’s also good to think of the concept of reification when you look at the Tone Scale and try so hard to make political systems, and each individual who lives under them, literally conform to single emotions, as Hubbard does here.”
LRH doesn’t say anything at all like – individuals “literally conform to single emotions”. Here’s the reference in SOS, Chapter One, The Tone Scale:
“Actually a person fluctuates on this scale from hour to hour and day to day. He
receives good news, he goes momentarily to tone 3.0. He receives bad news, he may sink for a moment to tone 1.0. He falls in love and for a month he is at level 3.5. His girl leaves him and for a week he is at tone 0.5. When he is very young he rides around tone 3.5. As he grows older his tone drifts down to 2.5. As an old man he may drift down to 0.0 and death either slowly or swiftly.”
And as for your idea about reification, you should check into Kirlian photography and what has been shown as regards emotions. 😉
You completely avoided the question.
And I know why, too.
You are bumping right up against the craziness of LRH and you don’t want to look at it. Too much is at risk of being lost for you if you look at it. So you avoid it, and you look at me instead, change the subject and tell me that I have MUs.
Classic. I’ve seen this so many times
Al, my answer was that the question you asked was based on a literal interpretation. And I did speak directly to your other points – for which you obviously have no rejoinder. Instead, you want me to go off on a wild goose chase with you. No, Al honey, Dio has clued me in on such cognitive set ups. 😀
p.s. I think you should just jump into the space suit with your favorite tights, pick up Dio and me and we all go to Elizabeth’s for sconces and tea. 🙂
Al, the following statement is just what LRH said about emotions 60 years ago . It’s copied from the website pasted below it, which also has some neat Kirlian photographs you should check out. Not just trying to make you wrong, really, I wanted to share this stuff with you.
Emotions have unique vibrations just like colors and physical objects do. These emotional vibrations also go from higher/faster to lower/slower. When you are laughing and having fun, your body’s vibrations are lighter (higher and faster). When you are tired and sick your vibrations are heavier (slower and lower). You know how when you are in love, you feel “energized”, “high”, like you’re “walking on a cloud?” That’s because your emotions are literally adding voltage and power, lightening your body. And when you’re negative and depressed, you feel sluggish, “feeling low,” “heavy”. “I’m down today.” Your emotional vibrations are giving your body a slower, lower vibration. This is not speaking metaphorically. This is scientifically measurable. (Molecules of Emotion by Dr. Candace Pert and HMI http://www.heartmath.org )
http://www.themagicofquantum.com/review.php
Diogenes wrote:
Another example; Just because I know it is an absolute truth that you need the living daylights beat out of you, to pound some sense into you, does not mean that I can do it.
This is how David Miscavige operates, too.
Once you start thinking with Scientology, this is where you end up.
Diogenes, your posts provide a fantastic specimen of the craziness of totalitarian ideologies like Scientology. Please keep writing, for all the world to see how great it is to operate on the tech and philosophy of Scientology, and how much we all could be improved by thinking like you do.
Alonzo,
Correction….
Your words:
Diogenes, your posts provide a fantastic specimen of the craziness of totalitarian ideologies like Scientology. Please keep writing, for all the world to see how great it is to operate on the tech and philosophy of Scientology, and how much we all could be improved by thinking like you do.
This has nothing to do with scientology. Scientology is now old hat.
This is a new day, this is Diology.
Omnisciently yours,
Dio
Marildi wrote:
Al, my answer was that the question you asked was based on a literal interpretation.
I see.
So after we use a dictionary to clear each definition of every word to full conceptual understanding, use false data stripping to ensure we are understanding exactly what was written, and demonstrate the passage “no civil rights of any kind” in clay, then we must remember not to take it literally.
This is yet another cognitive dissonance reduction technique: When LRH writes some totalitarian, completely crazy passage of writing, we must tell everyone not to take it literally. Roll your eyes when you do it too. But also make sure you apply it as above 100% standardly and without alteration.
I’ve seen this behavior for almost ten years in what I write to Scientologists but it stillastounds me every time I see it.
IMO you have a good point.
Al, if someone wanted to make the point about a viral disease being contagious, he might explain that if you eliminated all the hosts (humans) of that disease, you would eliminate the disease itself. And he might also give examples of how this has in fact occurred (which it has). Would you then call the alarm and say this guy was advocating genocide? I actually don’t think you are that literal – except when it comes to Scientology.
Gimme a break. LRH was not advocating genocide – he was making a point about the contagion of aberration! And supporting this viewpoint is not only everything else he had to say in that particular book, but all the rest of his works too.
I’ve said it before – you are not helping your cause (a good one) when you stretch things out of proportion to make them fit your bias, or when you demonstrate your MUs. You just make yourself an unreliable source.
Dio –
This has nothing to do with scientology. Scientology is now old hat.
This is a new day, this is Diology.
Omnisciently yours,
Dio
Funny, it sure looks like LRH and David Miscavige.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
We’ll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgment of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
The change it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that’s all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain’t changed
‘Cause the banners, they all flown in the last war
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
No, no!
I’ll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I’ll get all my papers and smile at the sky
For I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do ya?
Yeah!
There’s nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
Don’t get fooled again
No, no!
Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
“He needs a cage, ankle chains and a muzzle.”
Especially the muzzle. 😀 )))
Yours was by far the funnier post to me. We’re all showing our biases. 😉
LMAO.
now that is very funny!:)
Tell the guys about the fact that no WOG justice applies/can be applied, SCN internal. You remember “offenses and penalties”.
Its a high crime to sue SCNists or SCN orgs…………..which knocks off EVERY code law.
Hubbards hate against any “supressive” justice systems.
On top he has given a shit on his own system, by establishing the medieval and arbitrarily system
called: Fair game, disconnection, and RPF .
According to a footnote in Dianetics, Diogenese was an ancient Greek philosopher who was known to go around town with a lantern peeking into houses, looking for a sane man.
That was me.
I am still looking.
Dio
Dio, That has been sometime back and you are still continuing doing the something now as then? I can see You are really got stuck- jammed in some incident.
If I remember correctly I read it way back in LRH’s bulletin, the insane person thinks everybody else is insane except them self. oh, well you will have it handled sooner or later… no problem…few more doors you will need to walk up to till a field auditor will pull you in… who will put the cans in your hand and asks ‘Do you have a ARCB?’
Elizabeth and Dio, let’s make this decision about whether Dio should be World Dictator by basing it on this scale of “political philosophies and attitudes” from Science of Survival. Hmmm… Where would Dio’s plans fit in?
At 3.5, we have the liberal. The liberal reasons well, accepts wide responsibilities, and
is guided by high ethical principles. He is eager to seize upon any new idea which will
improve the society, and he is not suggestible, being swayed this way and that by any
propaganda, but reaches conclusions extremely rationally. He has a high regard for individual freedom, for property, and for the right of the powerfully productive person to be allowed to contribute to the society without hindrance, spontaneously and efficiently.
At 3.0, we have the person who is democratic, but who is somewhat more conservative
in his attitudes and more given to social regulations, being more in need of them. The term “democratic” is a somewhat loose one, but at this level it signifies the individual or system which allows personal freedom and has moderate regard for property and productive ability but is not particularly inventive or enthusiastic about refining and improving and enriching the social order along all of the dynamics.
The next familiar political level is the 1.5 level of fascism. The activities of Hitler and
Mussolini and the social orders they produced are, of course, the examples which come to
mind. The open declaration of intention to conquer, kill, and control by the most obvious and forceful methods is the mark of fascism. Justification is limited to the bluntest most bald-faced lies. Invalidation of other persons and social orders is straight-forward, angry, and lacking in any subtle pretense of reasonableness or moderation.
The next political level is the 1.1. level of Communism. The literature of Communism,
particularly in the works of Lenin, sets the tone of secret, flexible, deceptive operation which is observable in the methods of Communism throughout the world. In its strongholds such as the Soviet Union, in times and sections where it is not threatened, Communism will sometimes rise for brief periods to the level of 1.5, but in its normal action it partakes of all of the characteristics of the 1.1 level as they are outlined in this present work. The willingness to devote an unlimited amount of time to accomplishing secretly a destructive action which the fascist would accomplish immediately by force is implicit in Communism. Communism has an endless patience in tearing down by subtle propaganda a society or an idea which it never openly opposes in all that time, and an unwillingness ever to use open methods which would betray interest or activity. Communism, like the individual 1.1, makes an initial pretence of giving great assistance and help, and it keeps up this pretence in the face of any and allcontradictory evidence, blandly giving forth soothing justifications and assurances of the most sincere and deeply-felt interest in the good of all.
great post Marildi!
If he would become a dictator I not only need to move out of Canada but I would have to move to some other planet.. So dictatorship is out…
It’s also good to think of the concept of reification when you look at the Tone Scale and try so hard to make political systems, and each individual who lives under them, literally conform to single emotions, as Hubbard does here.
Think about it.
Elizabeth,
Where do you live?
Dio
Cambridge, ON.
I live in BC outside of Vancouver. How is your day going? I hope yours as beautiful, how you see the universe as I do, The pink cheery blossoms on the row of trees front of my house look glorious, the mountains in the back ground are washed over with purple haze, other trees are in bloom too, the plum and the crab.
Since it is spring the creative life-force flowing in abundance one can revel in the creation which surrounds.
I have a garden and there everything emergent, the clematises[ 14 different variety of blooms] twinning all over the trellises are full of buds, some ready to open. The roses too are budding, and I am fancier of oriental and trumpet lilies their growth reaches now 2-3’ but they won’t start blooming till late June. There will be Dutch and tall bearded irises opening their magical blossoms soon and dozens or other different variety of flowers will fallow, Bee balms for the humming birds will open in late July, dazzling of array of colors and fragrances to please the senses We create magic in order to experience.. We are my Friend what we create no more or no less.. be well, and look around see how beautiful is your universe…
Thanks Elizabeth,
My universe is equally as beautiful.
I have been to Vancouver a couple of times back in the 70s and 80s.
I love the mountains and the ocean too.
I am having a great day. The seminar I went to was good and very informative.
I am a research scientist amongst other hats.
I am going to do some research test plots today on some plants.
I am also going to start some tomatoes and cukes today for my garden.
And maybe a couple of other plants, inside, to transplant after the middle of May
I did it twice already and they did not make it. My house was too cold and no useful south window.
Your spring is somewhat earlier than mine.
Fruit trees are starting to bloom here.
Daffodils are done, tulips are almost done.
Dandelions are blooming almost everywhere.
They are one of natures best medicines and cure almost anything.
( I love wild foraging and already picked wild leeks and wild garlic mustard. Delicious and full of goodies and energy.
Got a 6 hr. video on wild foraging too, last weekend at the big health show in Toronto. )
Many other flowers around the house (planted by a previous owner,) of which I do not know the names of are blooming and others are coming out of the ground. There are a few kinds of lilies and glads that I know of, anyways.
Hollyhocks too.
I am an organic agricultural engineer and wholistic doctor by training.
Cheers,
Dio
Bloody Hell Dio, I new you were pulling my legs [ I told that to Marildi] all 8 of them and i cant locate one now! It has walked away by it self!!and i am limping now….ugh…. Dio, if you ever do that again i will roast your carcass on the pit and dont think i cant! But Admit it was much fun! Do you have a green house?
Dio, I never been in your city but lived in Toronto, Hamilton, Oakville and Port Colburn. I left Ontario in 72. Maple Ridge where I live now. By the way Dio in hungarian means walnut, so i am talking to a nut… 🙂 ground walnut mixed with powedered sugar on noodles is a hungarian dish.
Dio, I never been in your city but lived in Toronto, Hamilton, Oakville and Port Colburn. I left Ontario in 72.
Boy, you have been around
Maple Ridge where I live now. By the way Dio in hungarian means walnut, so i am talking to a nut… 🙂 ground walnut mixed with powedered sugar on noodles is a hungarian dish.
Your nut dish sounds delicious. I may just try it one of these days.
That makes me think of a Ukrainian noodle dish:
Make Noodles .
Add crushed fresh garlic and some olive oil, salt and pepper, to drained noodles.
Make sauce in sauce pan from mashed baby peas, ( it is a good idea to drain some or most of the juice off, so the sauce will not be too thin) heat to simmer, add 35% cream and fresh chopped dill. Simmer a few minutes.
Thicken with a bit of flour and the juice, if thicker sauce is desired.
Pour sauce over noodles and enjoy.
Hey, I met a guy by the name of David Hamel, who is on the net.
He used to live in Maple Ridge, now lives near Maddock, ONtario, I think.
According to him and, I think even newspaper reports, that when he lived in Maple ridge he made a flying saucer, that took off on him on a test flight and was never found again. He was not able to control the acceleration.
If I got that correctly,….. He said he was in the living room one day and the TV came on by itself and a ET transmission came through and told him how to make the machine.
http://davidhamel.com/UFO/
Dio
Marildi “You think he’s given up already? Hope not. He has a great sense of humor for an irrational, ruthless, heartless, extremist madman.”
What Dio has communicated today his other sides show how many different facets one being operates on. Which is impassible to guess because there are so many and not one is real as in solid.. good lessons to learn from..
Yes, the real Dio is our loving, intelligent, responsible, rational, reasonable, sane, free spirit. 🙂
This is a wondrous universe, what we give=create we get it back as a experience, that experience is someplace on the tone scale. But there is a “but” all the time, The words how the person speaks do not represent the tone where is that person is but the underlying energy flow which is the original creation that is the real thing and that we can read=experience a believe in because that created energy is the true tone level of the being.
Marildi when I say “bloody hell” I create fire-works and in my reality those words turn into sparkles-fly they hold all the colors of the rainbow and there is laughter among the stars. yet, those who only read the words, those who have different reality what is bloody hell to them i am just a low tone individual who dont have manners.. hehehe..I love it..
Flip Wilson
” what you see, is what you get”.
Never compromise your own reality and dont compare universes than free will exist.
Elizabeth and Miraldi…..
Elizabeth your words:
Marildi “You think he’s given up already? Hope not. He has a great sense of humor for an irrational, ruthless, heartless, extremist madman.”
What Dio has communicated today his other sides show how many different facets one being operates on. Which is impassible to guess because there are so many and not one is real as in solid.. good lessons to learn from..
D. You see, when a persons mind is opened up , or the use of the mind is increased to it;s full potential ( from the normal 10 or 15% to 100%), the power or ability can be used for good or bad. That is why it ( scn) is or has been called excalibur. Filbert calls his version of the bridge, Excalibur revisited.
Excalibur is a magic sword that cuts steel and stone and cuts both ways.
Dio,.. hold it right there .. just hold it….”minds full potential”, what is? Thinking? Like thoughts agreements… considerations? Just because the person have thoughts, which hold many view points on the same subject BUT that do not means the being reached the full reality, the availability or even know the full potential what is available to know.
Thinking is just that figure-figure…
PS: that ukranien dish sounds good I will make it. Also lived in Belgium, Austrian, England and USA.
Elizabeth,
I assume that you would figure it out, but I forgot to mention to salt and pepper the pea sauce to taste.
Even better with an Italian twist, generously topped with parmesan cheese.
I sometimes make that for guests and they go….. ooooh … ga-ga.
Dio
Dio thanks for the recipe, but you have not answered my above questions.
I belive talking in this case writing, the person should have good reality on the topic which they write about.
Wind is wind no matter from what direction it blows from.
Elizabeth,
Lets start again…
What questions?
Dio
There are two ways to establish a reputation.
One is to be praised, honored and respected by honest and intelligent men, (3.5 and up) and the other is to be condemned by rogues (2.5 and lower).
It is however best to secure the first, for it will be always accompanied by the latter.
Your loving omniscient, omnipotent, responsible, wonderful, free spirit, ET friend and guardian angel.
Dio.
Wow! What a fascinating discussion and fun too!
Geir — if you like winging it, maybe you should hand out slips of paper and let people write down questions about Scientology — then you take the ones up that you think are interesting.
SO GEIR!
What’s the update on the speech?
How did it go?
Alanzo
Check the new blog post.