PDA

View Full Version : scientology


PALEFORCE
09-11-2010, 06:20 PM
does anyone really know anything about this? i read 2 l ron hubbard boks, dianetics, and a book on cleansing. both where on my point, both about health, but i dont know why it gets hated on so much.

LORD NOSE
09-11-2010, 06:35 PM
does anyone really know anything about this? i read 2 l ron hubbard boks, dianetics, and a book on cleansing. both where on my point, both about health, but i dont know why it gets hated on so much.

it gets hated on by people who know nothing about it

Ghost In The 'Lac
09-11-2010, 06:37 PM
haha

unreal.

Undiluted Karma
09-11-2010, 06:50 PM
they sent me a little booklet about themselves, i saw nothing really wrong with it, i mean sure dianetics etc is strange, but what religion isnt? the only negative things ive heard about it are through rumours and the media, and them being labelled as cults. need to look into more into it.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
09-11-2010, 07:54 PM
Its a joke. Hubbard invented it all on a bet. I don't think you should accept a science fiction writer as a prophet...

PALEFORCE
09-11-2010, 08:48 PM
it gets hated on by people who know nothing about it

that seems to be the result @ wutang corp.com

check two
09-11-2010, 10:19 PM
I agree, I don't see how some people in other religions can call it crazy, when they go along with various bizarre stuff in their own religion like it's normal. Quite hypocritical. lol

LORD NOSE
09-11-2010, 10:35 PM
T1rn-oVHXGQ

spiggity_ace
09-12-2010, 02:43 PM
dont they require u to donate to them ur whole life savings or something

PALEFORCE
09-12-2010, 03:26 PM
i dont know. i was going to do a 2 week detox at the philly chapter and it cost like 3000 dollars

EAGLE EYE
09-12-2010, 06:09 PM
Why would a detox cost $3k?

Isn't their enough readily, available info on the web about carrying out such an act?

EAGLE EYE
09-12-2010, 06:12 PM
Also if I find out Dr. Dre actually holds a Doctorate of Scientology and is withholding DETOX because he wants a 3 thousand dollar down payment, his albums will be deleted or burned.

DeeBlock
09-12-2010, 07:44 PM
i dont know. i was going to do a 2 week detox at the philly chapter and it cost like 3000 dollars

Maybe cuz ya rectum is xtra crusty wit shit.

check two
09-12-2010, 09:22 PM
Yeah, all types of churches ask for money. How else do you think a pastor's Bentley is going to get paid for?

TheBoarzHeadBoy
09-12-2010, 09:41 PM
Basically (I feel like an older brother spoiling Santa Claus) there is no God, no magic, no meaning to life beyond what you want from it. All religions are false prophets speaking falsehoods to those who need the comfort. The prophets vary in character. Moses was an Egyptian Prince. Jesus was a pacifist-Hippy-Jew. Mohammad was a Pedophile Warlord. Nobody is perfect. They sold messages of hope to people who desperately needed it. Some people still need those ridiculous beliefs in spite of our science and general all round Nietzschian Ubermensch status. No use getting worked up over commoners burying their heads in the sand. I embrace the fact I'm not going to Heaven or Hell. That everything I do is at my own discretion and that success or failure is on my shoulders not three women weaving cloth next to the well of knowledge.

LORD NOSE
09-12-2010, 10:34 PM
Dt9SyNpirdo

Face of the Golden Falcon
09-13-2010, 02:56 AM
Basically (I feel like an older brother spoiling Santa Claus) there is no God, no magic, no meaning to life beyond what you want from it. All religions are false prophets speaking falsehoods to those who need the comfort. The prophets vary in character. Moses was an Egyptian Prince. Jesus was a pacifist-Hippy-Jew. Mohammad was a Pedophile Warlord. Nobody is perfect. They sold messages of hope to people who desperately needed it. Some people still need those ridiculous beliefs in spite of our science and general all round Nietzschian Ubermensch status. No use getting worked up over commoners burying their heads in the sand. I embrace the fact I'm not going to Heaven or Hell. That everything I do is at my own discretion and that success or failure is on my shoulders not three women weaving cloth next to the well of knowledge.

Maybe 1 in 5 posts is my actual opinion.

Where does this pretentious load of s**t fall into? The 1 or the remaining 4?

Either way it's become that 4.99 in 5 of your posts aren't worth reading.

HETEPU

TheBoarzHeadBoy
09-13-2010, 07:33 AM
That would be the 1 in four. I'm an atheist. Shocker.

http://www.spencersonline.com/images/spencers/products/processed/00927095.zoom.a.jpg

Uncle Steezo
09-16-2010, 04:56 PM
atheism is for cowards who don't want to take responsibility for their lives.
nietze is for children who want to sound cool. in life he was a complete failure in the fact that his philosophy cause more human suffering than the religious beliefs he tried to quash.

as far as the principles of dianetics go, i found them emlightening and were my first steps out of catholicsm and on my path toward truth.

scientology can get a bit wacky tho.
for example...

tT1UjCQTL0I

Undiluted Karma
09-16-2010, 05:26 PM
Its a joke. Hubbard invented it all on a bet. I don't think you should accept a science fiction writer as a prophet...

Oh ok and I should accept Jesus as a prophet?


hmm

beautifulrock
09-16-2010, 05:31 PM
Antoine Dodson is my personal lord and savior. I've beefed up security on my windows because of him. When did Jesus ever tell ya to do somehin' like that?

Run an tell that, homeboy, home, home, homeboy.

EAGLE EYE
09-16-2010, 05:46 PM
atheism is for cowards who don't want to take responsibility for their lives.
nietze is for children who want to sound cool. in life he was a complete failure in the fact that his philosophy cause more human suffering than the religious beliefs he tried to quash.

as far as the principles of dianetics go, i found them emlightening and were my first steps out of catholicsm and on my path toward truth.

scientology can get a bit wacky tho.
for example...



I would rather identify myself as a Singularitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularitarianism).... and that term should never be pigeon-holed as a person who has spent their life seeking alternatives to customary faith, but more as a respect for our exponentially evolving intelligence + technological advancement. I'm very open to the idea of a god(s) or a supreme architect exisiting which may have designed all of this. However when you train yourself in this way of thinking you still need a source for drawing your personal set of morals from.

This universe may still be a long way from "waking up" and performing it's true function. Intelligence is like what gasoline is to a motor.

This really isn't the thread I'd like to discuss this topic in though.

EAGLE EYE
09-16-2010, 05:48 PM
Antoine Dodson is my personal lord and savior. I've beefed up security on my windows because of him. When did Jesus ever tell ya to do somehin' like that?

Run an tell that, homeboy, home, home, homeboy.

Antoine is actually the second coming of Black Jesus warning the iPod generation about the dangers of rape and autoimmune-tune disease.

Uncle Steezo
09-16-2010, 07:03 PM
I would rather identify myself as a Singularitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularitarianism).... and that term should never be pigeon-holed as a person who has spent their life seeking alternatives to customary faith, but more as a respect for our exponentially evolving intelligence + technological advancement. I'm very open to the idea of a god(s) or a supreme architect exisiting which may have designed all of this. However when you train yourself in this way of thinking you still need a source for drawing your personal set of morals from.

This universe may still be a long way from "waking up" and performing it's true function. Intelligence is like what gasoline is to a motor.

This really isn't the thread I'd like to discuss this topic in though.

i guess the only response i have to this movement is that the universe itself is a superintelligence. i say this because in essence, our universe is made up of information that is constantly being exchanged in a intelligently constructed matrix. i would rather tap into that than to try and reinvent the wheel. its kind of like creating a robot that can tap dance rather than learning to do it yourself. i may be way off base tho.

EAGLE EYE
09-16-2010, 07:20 PM
That's actually another possibility. I recently read something (which I can't recall the article name) but the author put forth the idea that our universe may act like a hologram design where information is inscribed on two layers or planes, but we can only interact and modify 1; due to not being able to access higher dimensions which may or may not exist.

Uncle Steezo
09-16-2010, 08:23 PM
That's actually another possibility. I recently read something (which I can't recall the article name) but the author put forth the idea that our universe may act like a hologram design where information is inscribed on two layers or planes, but we can only interact and modify 1; due to not being able to access higher dimensions which may or may not exist.

hawking addressed this when trying to figure out whether or not information is destroyed by a black hole.

EAGLE EYE
09-16-2010, 08:39 PM
I think he admitted defeat (a colleague made a bet with him) because the information submitted or calculation performed can produce an answer or have it's quantum state untangled on the other side of the black hole (e.g. parallel universe)

Cthulhu
09-16-2010, 09:01 PM
atheism is for cowards who don't want to take responsibility for their lives.
nietze is for children who want to sound cool. in life he was a complete failure in the fact that his philosophy cause more human suffering than the religious beliefs he tried to quash.

as far as the principles of dianetics go, i found them emlightening and were my first steps out of catholicsm and on my path toward truth.

scientology can get a bit wacky tho.
for example...

tT1UjCQTL0I

I usually don't even bother responding to posts on this board because of the overwhelming waves of stupidity here, but I felt compelled because this is by far one of the dumbest things I've read in a while.

First of all, how is delving into obscurantist dogmas who tell placating lies, such as Scientology, Christianity, Islam, you name it, "taking responsibility for your life"?

Do you even personally know any atheists? The majority of the best scientists are atheists or agnostics. What aren't they taking responsibility for? Most atheists are skeptics who strive to criticize received wisdom. We are all human, of course, and just as susceptible to biases and irrationality as any other human, but we do try to sift through the bullshit with methodological naturalism, which why most of us threw off the shackles of religion. Hell, call me a naturalist if "atheist" is so distasteful and sanctimonious-sounding to you. I can't prove that god doesn't exist, but I simply don't need him to explain natural phenomena, and I find the likelihood of his more specific manifestations described in the Bible, Koran, the Vedas, etc. to be even more unlikely than some vaguer "universal force" wishy-wash.

I also would like to say that while I agree with BoarzHeadBoy's responses to the general credulity toward any old snake oil on here to be on point, he doesn't speak for me in regard to his half-baked Randian/faux-Nietzschean world-view, nor do my generally more left-wing views speak for atheists as a whole. Which brings me to my next point:

News flash! Most atheists are not followers of Nietzsche, nor do they consider his philosophy a good reason to be an atheist. Theologians just LOOOOOOVE Nietzsche because they can point to his shitty life an existential angst as proof of their beloved savior, but while I find some of his ideas very interesting, most of us never needed his philosophy to arrive at our disuse for the idea of the god and the supernatural. And how did his philosophy cause suffering? Are you perhaps referring to his wrongful appropriation by the Nazis on account of his backstabbing anti-Semite sister who drastically edited his posthumous publications? Do you realize that Nietzsche rejected anti-Semitism and it actually led to the fallout of his initial admiration for Wagner, who was another shit-eating anti-Semite?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_Friedrich_Nietzsche#Nietzsche.27s_cr iticisms_of_anti-Semitism_and_nationalism

So what is it about Scientology that you find so much more "truthful" over Catholicism's similar, if less tacky, bullshit? Is it the crappy pulp-sci-fi space opera mythology? The fact that the first publications of his "Dianetics" appeared in a Pulp science fiction magazine? The fact that they fleece thousands of dollars from their customers... ahem... parishioners for dubious devices that have no scientific/medial efficacy? The fact that they have been linked to numerous chilling crimes and character assassination plots?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_McPherson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disconnection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Snow_White
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Freakout

You guys constantly banter about secret evil organizations on here, yet here's a blatantly fucking evil organization right in front of your nose and you take a huge wiff of its bullshit and think it smells like roses.

EAGLE EYE
09-16-2010, 09:15 PM
^

good post.

Uncle Steezo
09-16-2010, 09:28 PM
I usually don't even bother responding to posts on this board because of the overwhelming waves of stupidity here, but I felt compelled because this is by far one of the dumbest things I've read in a while.

First of all, how is delving into obscurantist dogmas who tell placating lies, such as Scientology, Christianity, Islam, you name it, "taking responsibility for your life"?

Do you even personally know any atheists? The majority of the best scientists are atheists or agnostics. What aren't they taking responsibility for? Most atheists are skeptics who strive to criticize received wisdom. We are all human, of course, and just as susceptible to biases and irrationality as any other human, but we do try to sift through the bullshit with methodological naturalism, which why most of us threw off the shackles of religion. Hell, call me a naturalist if "atheist" is so distasteful and sanctimonious-sounding to you. I can't prove that god doesn't exist, but I simply don't need him to explain natural phenomena, and I find the likelihood of his more specific manifestations described in the Bible, Koran, the Vedas, etc. to be even more unlikely than some vaguer "universal force" wishy-wash.

I also would like to say that while I agree with BoarzHeadBoy's responses to the general credulity toward any old snake oil on here to be on point, he doesn't speak for me in regard to his half-baked Randian/faux-Nietzschean world-view, nor do my generally more left-wing views speak for atheists as a whole. Which brings me to my next point:

News flash! Most atheists are not followers of Nietzsche, nor do they consider his philosophy a good reason to be an atheist. Theologians just LOOOOOOVE Nietzsche because they can point to his shitty life an existential angst as proof of their beloved savior, but while I find some of his ideas very interesting, most of us never needed his philosophy to arrive at our disuse for the idea of the god and the supernatural. And how did his philosophy cause suffering? Are you perhaps referring to his wrongful appropriation by the Nazis on account of his backstabbing anti-Semite sister who drastically edited his posthumous publications? Do you realize that Nietzsche rejected anti-Semitism and it actually led to the fallout of his initial admiration for Wagner, who was another shit-eating anti-Semite?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_Friedrich_Nietzsche#Nietzsche.27s_cr iticisms_of_anti-Semitism_and_nationalism

So what is it about Scientology that you find so much more "truthful" over Catholicism's similar, if less tacky, bullshit? Is it the crappy pulp-sci-fi space opera mythology? The fact that the first publications of his "Dianetics" appeared in a Pulp science fiction magazine? The fact that they fleece thousands of dollars from their customers... ahem... parishioners for dubious devices that have no scientific/medial efficacy? The fact that they have been linked to numerous chilling crimes and character assassination plots?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_McPherson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disconnection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_%28Scientology))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Snow_White
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Freakout

You guys constantly banter about secret evil organizations on here, yet here's a blatantly fucking evil organization right in front of your nose and you take a huge wiff of its bullshit and think it smells like roses.

touched a nerve eh? look dude, if you want to believe you are the result of a one in a infinitesimally small chance of random assembly of atomic particles then thats your biz. but realize that you are just as deep in a fairytale as any other religious nut.

by recognizing that there is a power higher than yourself you also have to accept that you have a responsibility to that power.

atheism is just as silly as xenu or the spaghetti monster.

you obviously haven't read dianetics so i'm going to chalk up your comments to ignorance.

as far as knowing atheists, yes i know a few and they all rationalize their behavior by hiding behind the fact that "there is no God and therefore my actions have no significance beyond my sphere of influence."

but thanks for your input.

EAGLE EYE
09-16-2010, 09:40 PM
^
I think the atheists you personally know have led you to make sweeping generalizations about the rest of the community of people who identify themselves as that.


But like I said in my post about being a Singularitarian (which is not a substitute for traditional religion) ... that a man still needs to hold a set of values/morals which lead him in the right path and those can come from anywhere, but you wont get far consulting the spagetti monster.

EAGLE EYE
09-16-2010, 09:42 PM
and scientology is just another ponzi scheme, more polished and more "ooohs and ahhhs" batteries and teachings not included.

Cthulhu
09-16-2010, 09:46 PM
touched a nerve eh? look dude, if you want to believe you are the result of a one in a infinitesimally small chance of random assembly of atomic particles then thats your biz. but realize that you are just as deep in a fairytale as any other religious nut.

You tell me I need to read Hubbard's hack pulp sci-fi, looks like you need to read up on some basic evolutionary biology.

by recognizing that there is a power higher than yourself you also have to accept that you have a responsibility to that power.

How about I just recognize that I have a responsibility to my fellow human beings and would like to make life better for them on earth, HERE AND NOW, not because I feel obligated to serve some omniscient master who can give me no concrete proof of his existence.

atheism is just as silly as xenu or the spaghetti monster.

Funny that you should mention the spaghetti monster, which happens to be a JOKE invented by skeptics to criticize the idea of creationism. You still haven't explained why atheism or any nonbelief is sillier than accepting the idea of an omniscient creator because an old (or new) book says so and said book says that what it says is THE TRUTH (tm). All you spout off are strawmen.

you obviously haven't read dianetics so i'm going to chalk up your comments to ignorance.
If the silly pseudoscientific ideas in Dianetics helped you in some self-discovery, more power to ya. I'm just trying to make you aware of the very sinister and money-grubbing origins of said "holy" book.

as far as knowing atheists, yes i know a few and they all rationalize their behavior by hiding behind the fact that "there is no God and therefore my actions have no significance beyond my sphere of influence."

Well I'm sorry that you know some rather shitty atheists. Like I said, we're all human. I'm also very sorry for you that you need the idea of an omnipotent sky-daddy to make you behave like a decent person and care about other people, but be aware that there are many atheists who do care about their place in society and who they affect, but don't need any comforting fairytales or sanctimonious revelations to make them take action.

but thanks for your input.
Thanks for yours.

Uncle Steezo
09-16-2010, 09:46 PM
he asked me and i answered.
so in his world of 5 sense reality, since i never met an atheist who didn't think that way, then they must not exist. but i will say that every atheist i come in contact with is so full of "i dont believe in god therefore i'm smarter/better than you" that they really aren't the type of people i'd want to get to know anyway.

they sound EXACTLY like any other religious extremist.

Uncle Steezo
09-16-2010, 09:59 PM
You tell me I need to read Hubbard's hack pulp sci-fi, looks like you need to read up on some basic evolutionary biology.

[quote]by recognizing that there is a power higher than yourself you also have to accept that you have a responsibility to that power.[./quote]

How about I just recognize that I have a responsibility to my fellow human beings and would like to make life better for them on earth, HERE AND NOW, not because I feel obligated to serve some omniscient master who can give me no concrete proof of his existence.



Funny that you should mention the spaghetti monster, which happens to be a JOKE invented by skeptics to criticize the idea of creationism. You still haven't explained why atheism or any nonbelief is sillier than accepting the idea of an omniscient creator because an old (or new) book says so and said book says that what it says is THE TRUTH (tm). All you spout off are strawmen.


If the silly pseudoscientific ideas in Dianetics helped you in some self-discovery, more power to ya. I'm just trying to make you aware of the very sinister and money-grubbing origins of said "holy" book.



Well I'm sorry that you know some rather shitty atheists. Like I said, we're all human. I'm also very sorry for you that you need the idea of an omnipotent sky-daddy to make you behave like a decent person and care about other people, but be aware that there are many atheists who do care about their place in society and who they affect, but don't need any comforting fairytales or sanctimonious revelations to make them take action.


Thanks for yours.


you have made a few assumptions:

i support the church of scientology
i believe in the afterlife rewards system
i believe in skygod
i am a christian

all false.

this is the biggest fallacy that i see in atheism. they assume islamic-judeo-christian belief systems are the only forms of worship.

so its easy for them to turn their nose up at the idea of there being a god.

atheism is silly to me because it violates the very laws it tries to adhere to.
the biggest red flag is the something from nothing origin of the universe.
second, is the random formation of the dna molecule.

why does anyone feel the need to take care of others? would you call that love? love of family? love of humanity? what is love? is it an electrochemical reation? or is it the result of billions of years of evolution?

i would try to read some alternative "holy books" and even some new science books with an open mind before making such arrogant posts. you might surprise yourself and learn a few things about what you think reality is all about.

Cthulhu
09-16-2010, 10:00 PM
he asked me and i answered.
so in his world of 5 sense reality, since i never met an atheist who didn't think that way, then they must not exist. but i will say that every atheist i come in contact with is so full of "i dont believe in god therefore i'm smarter/better than you" that they really aren't the type of people i'd want to get to know anyway.

they sound EXACTLY like any other religious extremist.

Here we go again with the straw men. Nowhere did I say I only believe what I can perceive with my 5 senses. That's called solipsism. All I say is that I find the idea of an omnipotent creator unnecessary to explain natural phenomena and that the specific, and might I add, drastically varying accounts of this/these creator(s) written about in many books to be even less likely than the idea of some vague non-denominational omniscient intelligence creating everything.

And yes, atheists, including myself, can be sanctimonious towards believers. Myself, I generally don't do that to anyone I talk to in person because I'm a pretty laid back guy that would rather be your friend. I would only go off on the subject if you invited me to it or if you came at me on the street with some bigoted pamphlet. I don't believe atheists are inherently smarter than religious people by any means, but a lot of us do get a bit full of ourselves when we see people who could otherwise be very intelligent deluding themselves with ideas that look really phony to us or are insulting to the intelligence of anyone who doesn't share that particular sectarian view (believer or non-believer).

PALEFORCE
09-16-2010, 10:06 PM
and scientology is just another ponzi scheme, more polished and more "ooohs and ahhhs" batteries and teachings not included.

i dont think you know what a ponzi scheme is...(good thing you got wikipedia for brains) but if you would plz entertain me....

btw good discussion

Uncle Steezo
09-16-2010, 10:08 PM
a man still needs to hold a set of values/morals which lead him in the right path and those can come from anywhere, but you wont get far consulting the spagetti monster.

but where does that knowledge of the "right path" come from?
by asking yourself this question "what is the right thing to do?" you are in fact communing with God.

you are looking inside of yourself, actually above yourself, trying to speak to a power greater than your own. what you may want to do is not in line with what you "know" you are SUPPOSED to do. this duality is one of the greatest pieces evidence of God.

and i'm not talking conditioning from parents/school. even babies know that inflicting pain on others is wrong.

i wish that faggot sid didn't delet my youtube account cause i did 4 part series explaining why atheism is silly and even posted scientific evidence that supported the existence of an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that we call God.

Uncle Steezo
09-16-2010, 10:21 PM
Here we go again with the straw men. Nowhere did I say I only believe what I can perceive with my 5 senses. That's called solipsism. All I say is that I find the idea of an omnipotent creator unnecessary to explain natural phenomena and that the specific, and might I add, drastically varying accounts of this/these creator(s) written about in many books to be even less likely than the idea of some vague non-denominational omniscient intelligence creating everything.

And yes, atheists, including myself, can be sanctimonious towards believers. Myself, I generally don't do that to anyone I talk to in person because I'm a pretty laid back guy that would rather be your friend. I would only go off on the subject if you invited me to it or if you came at me on the street with some bigoted pamphlet. I don't believe atheists are inherently smarter than religious people by any means, but a lot of us do get a bit full of ourselves when we see people who could otherwise be very intelligent deluding themselves with ideas that look really phony to us or are insulting to the intelligence of anyone who doesn't share that particular sectarian view (believer or non-believer).

but here is the thing. you need concrete evidence to accept the existence of a being who exists outside of what we consider to be concrete. its like trying to see a black hole. you can't.

natural phenomena...
science can only describe the laws of the universe. calling divine omniscience "quantum entanglement" does not change the fact that nothing goes on unseen in the universe.

discovering that there is energy and matter that permeates what we thought was a vacuum is no different than acknowledging that "God is everywhere"


yeah there has been a lot of distortion and outright manipulation by the respective institutions but love compassion and forgiveness have never steered anyone wrong.

EAGLE EYE
09-16-2010, 10:27 PM
but where does that knowledge of the "right path" come from?
by asking yourself this question "what is the right thing to do?" you are in fact communing with God.

you are looking inside of yourself, actually above yourself, trying to speak to a power greater than your own. what you may want to do is not in line with what you "know" you are SUPPOSED to do. this duality is one of the greatest pieces evidence of God.

and i'm not talking conditioning from parents/school. even babies know that inflicting pain on others is wrong.

i wish that faggot sid didn't delet my youtube account cause i did 4 part series explaining why atheism is silly and even posted scientific evidence that supported the existence of an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that we call God.


I personally try to refrain from using "god" in these discussion because it has too many meanings and interpretations for people on this planet and it makes discussions go astray.

I'd rather use the term architect, being or host.


Trying to explain complex emotions like love or hate and the concept of what it is to be "conscious" is by far the hardest challenge a human can take on.


I can only speculate that this universe is a simulation either closely monitored because we are an interesting species or our role is to carry out some kind of evolutionary algorithm. If our intelligence evolves to the point where it manifests outwards at the speed of light maybe that's when we meet our maker/architect/host.

Cthulhu
09-16-2010, 10:28 PM
[QUOTE=Cthulhu;1966340]You tell me I need to read Hubbard's hack pulp sci-fi, looks like you need to read up on some basic evolutionary biology.




you have made a few assumptions:

i support the church of scientology
i believe in the afterlife rewards system
i believe in skygod
i am a christian

all false.

this is the biggest fallacy that i see in atheism. they assume islamic-judeo-christian belief systems are the only forms of worship.

I never assumed any of this, except perhaps the Scientology thing. I don't see how you can separate the ideas of Scientology from the sleazy businessman/ideologue who wrote them, but, hey, I'm willing to believe that could be a shortcoming on my part.

In any case, I actually assumed you probably weren't a Christian, but your posts seemed to insinuate that one cannot be moral without believing in a higher power, which I believe to be false.

so its easy for them to turn their nose up at the idea of there being a god.

Actually, plenty of atheist critics have turned their criticism towards non-Abrahamic religions as well as pseudo-sciences and superstitions as well. In fact, the very fact that I am criticizing Scientology should tip you off that I don't hold this straw man view you are supposing, since Scientology couldn't be farther from the Abrahamic religions.

atheism is silly to me because it violates the very laws it tries to adhere to.
the biggest red flag is the something from nothing origin of the universe.
second, is the random formation of the dna molecule.

Honestly, I'm a layman here and am not the one to help you out with these arguments. I've read the appropriate summaries by experts in their fields, but I don't have the time and energy to summarize them for you here when you could go research that yourself, but for a simple reply, I've read some arguments from quantum physics that something can come from nothing. It's also possible that there never was an ultimate beginning, but things simply were. (In fact, god or some creator isn't really a satisfying explanation to this question, because it then begs the question, who created god? If you just say god was always there, why not just remove god from the picture and say the universe or all the components needed for it to form were already there?) But all this is really missing the point and isn't some precept that atheism is founded upon.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say about DNA. Are you confusing the theory of abiogenesis with the theory of evolution? Generally, the processes aren't random, but follow laws and conditions already preexisting in physics. Again, I'm not the man to explain this to you in detail.

But back to atheism: it's not necessary to have these answers to be logically atheist. That's why I suggested you might just call me a naturalist or even just a skeptic. I leave open the very remote possibility that a god could be real, but I find it to be an unnecessary leap of faith to say that he or it must have created or set things in motion when there is no proof of such a thing. I'd rather say I simply don't know than to belief in something for which there is no proof. If, however, naturalistic thought led us to the conclusion that there is some creator, I would probably accept it (whether I would feel the need to obey this creator is another matter entirely - which begs the question of whether a creator would even care enough about us puny little things to want our worship; he'd have to be some kind of man-child). What I won't do is believe in a creator because someone claimed they received some special revelation and that I should believe them on faith.

why does anyone feel the need to take care of others? would you call that love? love of family? love of humanity? what is love? is it an electrochemical reation? or is it the result of billions of years of evolution?

Well the answers to the last two questions are probably yes. Evolution does go a long way to explain our behavior and our needs of love and friendship. Humans aren't the strongest animals in the food chain, but we survived through group cohesion with more complicated system of social interaction. A lot of our drives for altruism and familial love can be chalked up to survival and procreation needs.

i would try to read some alternative "holy books" and even some new science books with an open mind before making such arrogant posts. you might surprise yourself and learn a few things about what you think reality is all about.

If my initial response seemed arrogant, it was only because I was incensed by the very profound arrogance of your original post. Notice I have attempted to level with you. I don't think I'm a superior human being to you because of my beliefs, I just don't belief in any gods or supernatural things and I fail to understand the mindset that needs such things to make sense of the world. Let's face it, we're not gonna meet eye-to-eye. My taking the time to reply to these posts is only an attempt to try to represent atheism from my point of view because I felt you were unfairly, might I say, arrogantly, dismissing it.

Uncle Steezo
09-16-2010, 10:48 PM
yeah i feel you. much of the original post that you responded to was a direct jab at boarzhead's mouth since he often comes in here talking out of his ass.

one minute his a buddhist on his path to nirvana the next minute he's a neonazi elitist and now hes a neitzian nihilist. i guess i could have just told him to shut the fuck up.

but to answer your question of why do i believe...
it comes from the heart, if you can get that concept, my mind can understand and accept the science but it doesn't satisfy the heart. because i feel His presence.

its like being in love, someone can tell you that its a combination of desirable traits and a neurological reaction but you know in your heart that its deeper than that.
or to speak to the example of family, you can understand that you want to protect your children in order to continue the species but the feeling your child brings you goes way beyond biology.

biology can't explain away everything because as humans we can transcend our biological nature. this is part of the philosophy behind "we are made in God's image"

for me the best way for me to verbalize "what God is" is that he is an intelligent field of matter/energy that assembles what is inside that field into what we call reality. similar to the way iron filings assemble into lines when placed inside a magnetic field.
a HUGE oversimplification, but i'm trying to be brief.

EAGLE EYE
09-16-2010, 11:13 PM
and in these coming decades we will transcend our biological v1.0 bodies and it's going to have profound effects on what it means to be "human". I think our soul or conscious state that can be represented as a unique pattern of information is what remains even when we merge with machine or light.

Clan Destine
09-18-2010, 02:31 PM
Everything else aside, I think people need to appraise a system of beliefs individually.

Because it is a system of beliefs with certain promises and wrappings it doesn't mean you should immediately praise it or accept.

Looking into Scientology I have learned that it is a pretty nasty organization bent on preying off people's weaknesses, brainwashing them, and taking their money.

There are many 'survivors' of Scientology that attest to these experiences and even go through the specific mechanics of how the organization keeps people in mental straight jackets and extorts them for money or labour.

If you're going to criticize Nietzsche based on how his life turned out, you have to also do the same to Elron Hubbard. A man who inveighed against psychiatry and medical drugs, but went crazy and binged off them in his later years.

Sense-A
09-18-2010, 04:11 PM
God is the only real truth I know and my only salvation.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
09-18-2010, 05:03 PM
I don't think anyone here besides Cthulhu understands that atheism is not the same as Atheism (lowercase its the lack of a belief in God, in the uppercase I refer to Atheism as an ideology). I'm atheist. I'm not an Atheist. I don't require belief in a God to understand my life. That's atheism. That's all it is. Atheism as an ideology is something that perverts the whole point. Actually seeking the destruction of religion via the ideology of Anti Theism is a waste of time because as can be seen in the baseless arguments here, most theists are idiots. There are smart theists and stupid Atheists. I'm not saying that atheism is automatically correct. But its more correct then theism.

I'm not saying God is impossible because that's a stretch, but I'm saying its more easy to comprehend the lack of a God then there being one. Most of you seem to be dressing up pseudo science in a fake beard and calling it God when it is completely different then any recognized God. The very idea of something being inherently unknowable pretty much makes it a case of Schrodinger's cat. Basically using physics God exists and doesn't exist simultaneously until we can prove it one way or another. Therefore it becomes impossible to prove or disprove God. Therefore you can't with certainty believe in God or disbelieve in God. So the only intelligent choice is to abstain from looking because its a waste of time.

Therefore atheism makes sense. You shouldn't need a God to be the cornerstone of your beliefs.

Uncle Steezo
09-18-2010, 05:20 PM
^
this is why children need positive role models.

Sense-A
09-18-2010, 05:31 PM
I think this is the first time I've ever disagreed with you.

I'm not saying that atheism is automatically correct. But its more correct then theism.

So you can't prove it either way but it is more correct. I like how that works.

I'm not saying God is impossible because that's a stretch, but I'm saying its more easy to comprehend the lack of a God then there being one.

The "easy" way is usually the wrong way. Just sayin' ...

it becomes impossible to prove or disprove God.

Then why did you just call one side of the argument "more correct"? Different people require different levels/forms of proof to satisfy their own ability to accept something as true.

Therefore you can't with certainty believe in God or disbelieve in God.

I believe in God with certainty. I call it faith.

So the only intelligent choice is to abstain from looking because its a waste of time.

What you really mean is that YOUR choice is the intelligent choice, which is merely your opinion.

Therefore atheism makes sense. You shouldn't need a God to be the cornerstone of your beliefs.

Therefore Theism makes sense. Some people DO NEED God to be the cornerstone of their beliefs because that is the only way they get by.

I agree with WUnded Fox in regard to his statement that most Atheists are elitist. I too believe that most Atheists (not all) that I have had this discussion with in the past do consider themselves intellectually superior than people who believe in God. Elitism is a negative human characteristic imo.

As far as Scientology: I really don't know shit about it and was never interested enough to look it up. I'm still not interested.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
09-18-2010, 09:35 PM
I think this is the first time I've ever disagreed with you.



So you can't prove it either way but it is more correct. I like how that works.

What I'm saying is its more reasonable to be skeptical then to take the proverbial leap of faith.

The "easy" way is usually the wrong way. Just sayin' ...

Morally perhaps.

Then why did you just call one side of the argument "more correct"? Different people require different levels/forms of proof to satisfy their own ability to accept something as true.

As I said, my perspective is that its wiser to be skeptical then to be a believer without concrete fact. If you have concrete fact I can't change your mind. That's why I'm an atheist not an Atheist. I shouldn't be telling people there is no God because I don't know what God is. I can't disprove it.

I believe in God with certainty. I call it faith.

I don't believe in God with uncertainty. I call it reason.

What you really mean is that YOUR choice is the intelligent choice, which is merely your opinion.

I think its smarter to be a skeptic. While I agree there is a romantic quality to fantastic tales and taking the leap of faith that is appealing I also think that may be more of a psychological factor then a rational one. People want to believe in something. I'd rather believe in nothing. Its about objectivity.

Therefore Theism makes sense. Some people DO NEED God to be the cornerstone of their beliefs because that is the only way they get by.

Yes and I don't believe I have the ability or the authority to tell them their God is fake. I can't say that for certain. But I can be pretty damn sure its not. The more one looks at the evolution of religion the less one can believe it to be anything more then a story.

I agree with WUnded Fox in regard to his statement that most Atheists are elitist. I too believe that most Atheists (not all) that I have had this discussion with in the past do consider themselves intellectually superior than people who believe in God. Elitism is a negative human characteristic imo.

As far as Scientology: I really don't know shit about it and was never interested enough to look it up. I'm still not interested.

I think elitism is a positive human characteristic. It implies that some people are better then others. Religion is elitist. Christians are better then non Christians. Muslims should kill nonbelievers. Jews can't marry gentiles. See what I mean? Elitism is a form of tribalism. Humans naturally group into bodies of like people. Its part of our natural urge to organize and order. As a human I seek out like minded people.

You look at IQ scores and its clear that some people are better then others. I'm about the 99% percentile (I'm like 137 if I recall which is about where Bill Clinton is haha). Doesn't mean I know everything, but I'm no fool. I think at a higher level then other people. My thoughts are often on things my peers don't even consider. Sometimes I wish I was dumber because I waste so much time on things that don't really effect my life. Perhaps I'm stroking my ego, perhaps I have some unknown higher purpose. Be it divine or not. I'm not going to claim I'm the Messiah until I spend my token 40 days fasting in the desert under a fig tree. :p

But I'm also possibly mildly psychic which is something I have yet to fit into my understanding. My random occurrences of precognition doesn't really make sense but its definitely there. I've been aware of it since I was in elementary school. But I'm not going to jump to the conclusion its anything unnatural. It may simply be a higher level of observation. Basically its like a deja vu but rather then a tradition "I feel like I've been here" its more like "I distinctly remember dreaming this" but its always entirely useless and I have no way to effect it. I'll suddenly catch on to the fact that my eyes are viewing some insignificant series of events for a second time. I sometimes have very surreal or realistic dreams which make little sense but then turn out to be real months later. However I see no way to test or observe it so from a rational standpoint I don't believe in it. Which seems rather crazy but I don't trust my own senses a lot of the time. Human senses are fallible and not the final say on truth.

That sounds kind of religious. Maybe it is. Basically I'm a romantic who tries to be a realist.

Sense-A
09-18-2010, 09:59 PM
But generalizing people is bad. So making any sort of assumption in regard to someone's intelligence simply based on whether they believe in GOD or not is an elementary and foolish assumption. Some of the smartest people in our history have believed in God.

That list includes:

Albert Einstein
Stephen Hawking
T.S. Eliot
Martin Luther King Jr.
Ghandi
Mother Teresa
Chuck Norris!!!
Andy Fucking Griffith
Elvis
Abraham Lincoln
George W Bush !!!!
Leonardo De Vinci
Beethoven
George foreman
Muhammad Ali
Michaelangelo
Malcolm X
Mozart
Isaac Newton
Galileo Galilei
Robert Boyle
Charles Darwin - HIMSELF!
Rene Descartes
Gregor Mendel - expert on genetics
William Thomson Kelvin
Theodore Roosevelt

Yeah all these people were just fools I guess... Does disbelieving in GOD automatically make you smarter? NO. Simply no. SO the modern ridicule that theists receive is not just.

Albert Einstein said, "The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible." He meant that, unlike our homes on a bad day, the universe is not just a conglomeration of objects each going its own way. Everything in the universe follows laws, without exception. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704206804575467921609024244.html

Once you realize some proof of GOD in your life it strikes you and it is something almost impossible to ignore or unlikely to forget. A sort of revelation that I think hits everyone at least once in their lifetime whether they recognize it or not.

There is divine order in the universe. The laws. The physics. The math that is fundamental in everything. Sacred Geometry. Everything follows order. Yet the second law of thermodynamics says that everything moves toward chaos. Isn't that directly in contradiction to the theory of evolution? We've been fed evolutionary science since 2nd grade. The more I learn the more I am actually CONVINCED that there is a GOD.

Forces of good and evil exist through us.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
09-18-2010, 10:11 PM
I'm not saying that you are dumb because you believe in God. I'm saying dumb people need to believe in God. Lots of brilliant people believe in God. A lot don't. Intelligent people though tend to be free thinkers with unique views of God. Einstein believed in God because he saw all the math as a means to understanding God's plan rather then a replacement for God. Richard Dawkins doesn't believe in God because he feels like its a well ingrained habit not a real need. So he's come up with pretty reasonable tests for religion and superstitions and they always fail or come up as within the random probability range. He's a very rational thinker.

He isn't saying there can't be a God but he's saying there isn't an observable God. That's different. He's saying based on any type of test imaginable "God" will emerge as random chance and nothing more. You can spin it as you like but its basically a "myth busted" approach. As a rational man he'll be the first to change his mind should there be something concrete enough for him. If a glowing man appears and flowers are sprouting from his footsteps and angels blowing trumpets follow in his wake then I'm sure Dawkins is going to be like "I was wrong. Good thing Jesus is so forgiving or I'd be in hot water."

Sense-A
09-18-2010, 10:55 PM
Yeah but even your boy Richard Dawkins can't come up with a scientific method of testing the existence of GOD. What proof do you want? What miracle is great enough?

Sorry if angels aren't blowing trumpets for ya.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
09-18-2010, 11:24 PM
I don't want a miracle. I don't want a God. If there is one fine. It can make itself observable or it can not. I'd rather just ignore the topic in general. At the end of the day what's it matter? Realistically when you die you're dead. I watched my dog die in my living room last year. I don't think she magically got spirited away to heaven. There's something about a beloved animal (I'd give a beloved family member as an example but I've never watched someone die in person) lying in a puddle of its own urine that makes you realize we're just a piece of meat. Heaven's a nice thought, but its not likely. I can accept that when you die that's the end. Its sad but we need sad to distinguish happiness. That's why the idea of heaven sounds like a joke. I can't ever be perfectly happy. Heaven would be like a never ending (literally) orgasm that never reaches a climax. That's boring. I'm much happier being sad part of the time then not being sad at all.

I'd prefer being in charge of my destiny then it being predetermined by some outside force.

So maybe I'm biased, but we all are. Atheism makes more sense. Doesn't mean its fact but its a reasonable perspective.

Share with me reason why you believe in God. I mean events or feelings or thoughts that confirmed it for you. I don't think blind faith is worth very much.

Frank Sobotka
09-19-2010, 09:11 AM
Yeah but even your boy Richard Dawkins can't come up with a scientific method of testing the existence of GOD. What proof do you want? What miracle is great enough?

Sorry if angels aren't blowing trumpets for ya.
Because there is no scientific method of testing the existence of God.

Miracles don't prove anything, just because something is highly improbable doesn't mean it will never happen.

God wouldn't need miracles unless he fucked up when creating the universe.
Which according to all religions, god does not do.

Sense-A
09-19-2010, 09:44 AM
Romans 1:20, "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Romans 1:21, "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened"

Genesis 2:7 "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul".

Hebrews 11:3, "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Jhn 1:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=jhn#comm/3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
09-19-2010, 10:36 AM
Romans 1:20, "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Romans 1:21, "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened"

Genesis 2:7 "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul".

Hebrews 11:3, "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Jhn 1:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=jhn#comm/3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

That doesn't answer my question. What confirmed your belief in God?

Which I will follow with the statement: You do realize that the Judeo Christian God is Zeus right?

Uncle Steezo
09-19-2010, 10:57 AM
this has become the battle of non sequiturs.
so far boarz is winning out of sheer volume but sense-a's are bigger and stronger.

i'm riveted.

Cthulhu
09-27-2010, 05:19 PM
Oh my god this is hilarious.

But generalizing people is bad. So making any sort of assumption in regard to someone's intelligence simply based on whether they believe in GOD or not is an elementary and foolish assumption. Some of the smartest people in our history have believed in God.

That list includes:

Albert Einstein let me refer you to the following wikipedia blurb

The question of scientific determinism gave rise to questions about Einstein's position on theological determinism, and whether or not he believed in God, or in a god. In 1929, Einstein told Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."[113] In a 1954 letter, he wrote, "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly."[114] In a letter to philosopher Erik Gutkind, Einstein remarked, "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."[115]

Repeated attempts by the press to present Albert Einstein as a religious man provoked the following statement:

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
—Albert Einstein[116]

Not that it's relevant, but for what it's worth to your political views, Einstein was a socialist. I'm waiting for you to the list of "smartest people of our time who were socialists" that will include Einstein and Bertrand Russell.

Stephen Hawking - again:

Throughout his early work, Hawking used the word "God" in metaphorical meanings but also suggested the existence of God was unnecessary to explain the origin of the universe, as discussed in A Brief History of Time.[51] However, his newest book The Grand Design, as well as interviews with the Telegraph and the Channel 4 documentary Genius of Britain, clarify that he does "not believe in a personal God."[52] Hawking writes, "The question is: is the way the universe began chosen by God for reasons we can't understand, or was it determined by a law of science? I believe the second." Hawking adds, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing." Graham Farmello of the Telegraph writes, "God did not create the universe, Stephen Hawking revealed."[53][54]

His ex-wife, Jane said during their divorce proceedings that he was an atheist.[55][56] Hawking has stated that he is "not religious in the normal sense" and he believes that "the universe is governed by the laws of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws."[57] Hawking compared religion and science in 2010, saying: "There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, [and] science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win because it works."[58]

T.S. Eliot
Martin Luther King Jr.
Ghandi not the god you believe in
Mother Teresa Mother Tersa was smart?
Chuck Norris!!! lol, Chuck Norris is one of the "smartest people in our history"?
Andy Fucking Griffith see above
Elvis see above
Abraham Lincoln
George W Bush !!!! are you fucking kidding me?
Leonardo De Vinci we know hardly anything about this guy's personal life. It's likely he believed in god, but then so did almost everyone in Renaissance Italy. It's not really fair to use examples that come before the advent of modernist thought and scientific theories that help replace religious dominance. Also, painting religious subjects, doesn't equate with Piety, it's what he was comissioned to do. Tons of Renaissance religious artwork contain bawdy satire and even anti-clerical content
Beethoven
George foreman again, who ever said he was one of the smartest?
Muhammad Ali see above
Michaelangelo see Leonardo
Malcolm X
Mozart
Isaac Newton
Galileo Galilei this is particularly rich, not because he believed in god, but because his willingness to adhere to naturalism led him into conflict with the Catholic Church
Robert Boyle
Charles Darwin - HIMSELF!
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
Later on in the book he dismisses an argument for religion being innate:

"Belief in God — Religion. — There is no evidence that man was aboriginally endowed with the ennobling belief in the existence of an Omnipotent God. On the contrary there is ample evidence, derived not from hasty travellers, but from men who have long resided with savages, that numerous races have existed, and still exist, who have no idea of one or more gods, and who have no words in their languages to express such an idea. The question is of course wholly distinct from that higher one, whether there exists a Creator and Ruler of the universe; and this has been answered in the affirmative by some of the highest intellects that have ever existed."
"The belief in God has often been advanced as not only the greatest, but the most complete of all the distinctions between man and the lower animals. It is however impossible, as we have seen, to maintain that this belief is innate or instinctive in man. On the other hand a belief in all-pervading spiritual agencies seems to be universal; and apparently follows from a considerable advance in man's reason, and from a still greater advance in his faculties of imagination, curiosity and wonder. I am aware that the assumed instinctive belief in God has been used by many persons as an argument for His existence. But this is a rash argument, as we should thus be compelled to believe in the existence of many cruel and malignant spirits, only a little more powerful than man; for the belief in them is far more general than in a beneficent Deity. The idea of a universal and beneficent Creator does not seem to arise in the mind of man, until he has been elevated by long-continued culture."

"I may say that the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God; but whether this is an argument of real value, I have never been able to decide. I am aware that if we admit a first cause, the mind still craves to know whence it came from and how it arose. Nor can I overlook the difficulty from the immense amount of suffering through the world. I am, also, induced to defer to a certain extent to the judgment of many able men who have fully believed in God; but here again I see how poor an argument this is. The safest conclusion seems to me to be that the whole subject is beyond the scope of man's intellect; but man can do his duty."

"I have never been an Atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God". He added that "I think that generally (and more and more as I grow older), but not always, that an Agnostic would be a more correct description of my state of mind."

Rene Descartes
Gregor Mendel - expert on genetics
William Thomson Kelvin
Theodore Roosevelt -again, was he really one of the smartest?

.

grt05
10-01-2010, 07:24 AM
^ :clap:

WARPATH
03-05-2011, 09:55 PM
"You shouldn't be scrubbing the floor on your hands and knees. Get yourself a nigger; that's what they're born for." -L. Ron Hubbard

Robert
03-06-2011, 01:19 AM
atheism is for cowards who don't want to take responsibility for their lives.


if you want to believe you are the result of a one in a infinitesimally small chance of random assembly of atomic particles then thats your biz. but realize that you are just as deep in a fairytale as any other religious nut.

by recognizing that there is a power higher than yourself you also have to accept that you have a responsibility to that power.

atheism is just as silly as xenu or the spaghetti monster.


Lol, go fish.

theheavens
03-06-2011, 02:09 AM
.

june181972
03-06-2011, 10:21 AM
People hate on Scientology because the core of Lafayette Ronald Hubbard's teachings is that our way thinking as individuals, and in turn functioning as a society, is fundamentally wrong; and ultimately against nature itself.

A wide awoke man is much much harder to control.

LORD NOSE
03-06-2011, 02:35 PM
fuck tom cruise and alexander bruce
son of henry conyers
henry came to uk to fuck bazas white mom and baza was raised by her only

he's a uncle tom the biggest black nigger uncle tom in britain.. he's a cock sucking ngiger

who are you ?

PALEFORCE
03-06-2011, 03:11 PM
great build(syke)

pges deep and nobody really explained anything about Scientology

Fatal Guillotine
03-13-2011, 12:40 PM
Hubbard did an incredible amount of research into past lives. Because of that Christians think he is the devil, etc.

Hubbard was being attacked from the get go because he was interfering with the plans of the Illuminati. In 1963 the United States government conducted a raid with drawn guns on one of Hubbard's organisations in WDC. Hubbard conducted an investigation into who was attacking Scientology and found that the source of the attacks to be less than twelve men who were members of the Bank of England and other higher financial institutions and who owned and controlled newspaper chains and were directors of planetary mental health groups (i.e., psychiatry, which was basically imported into the U.S. from Nazi Germany via CIA Operation Paperclip). He also discovered that the bankers had secured most of the world's gold reserves and had bankrupted governments in order to obtain political control. This is not a Scientology secret because Hubbard revealed this information on an audio tape that he made in 1967 entitled "RJ 67". It is the primary reason why Scientology has been attacked and lied about in the media.

According to Ron Hubbard's right hand man, Captain Bill Robertson, Scientology was taken over in the early 1980s so he and many other original Scientologist left the church. It was later completely taken over by the IRS.

tostones
03-13-2011, 07:11 PM
Yo when I think about scientology it becomes immediately linked in my mind (thanks to mainstream media) celebrities and laughable space alien stories.

I imagine L. Ron must have seen his alien stories as metaphorical, but do scientologists really them as being literal? At what point in the studies do they start introducing Xenu and all that?

PEACE from the planet Teegaeack

Clan Destine
03-14-2011, 01:33 PM
great build(syke)

pges deep and nobody really explained anything about Scientology

Read, THE COMPLEX, written by a guy who is in the church 20+ years. Do some research on your own. The church is clearly a brainwashing money machine. They get people who are emotionally vulnerable with some mildly helpful techniques and convince them this way of the truth and beneficence of Scientology.

Marks in the church are weak and mentally hollow, they are nothing. Their head is full of empty principles and jargon. Confront them and they crumble.

Do you really respect any church that makes you pay upwards of $50,000 to get to the next phase, and to continue to pay for successive phases, that needs to shield its followers from the outside world, that aggressively sues anybody who brings a word against them? that makes those who can't pay labour for nothing other than being part of the church? Who's top disciples have nothing to show for their supposed 'power' or being 'clear' other than the assertion itself?

The first and second sessions of scientology are literally aggressive brainwashing sessions. They keep people upwards of 12 hours, and most of them cannot recall what has happened to them.

There's a reason the church has shrunk since the proliferation of the internet.

Fatal Guillotine
07-17-2012, 10:25 AM
up