<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
		<description>Discuss Flying teapots and parlor tricks</description>
		<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2026 09:49:21 -0600</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="https://mail.scientology-cult.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/450.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Science, indeed</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3975</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Newer, get a hold of Dr. Bruce H. Lipton's lectures series The Wisdom of Your Cells about the new subject of epigenetic biology. If you are even somewhat familiar with LRH's research you will find much scientifically based validation of many of his findings that grew into the practical applications of Scientology.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Joe Howard</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:20:44 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3975</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Science v. religion</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3974</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Umm, fail. LRH never revoked his claim that it was a science. Post the ref if you can... BTW, you just conceded that it isn't a science. Something either is or, isn't. There is no middle ground. I think that is lost on you though.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Newer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:42:26 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3974</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Science v. religion</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3973</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Actually, Newer, LRH's real statement was that Scientology was the meeting ground between science and religion. My point about proving the existence of love is . . . is . . . is . . . well, it is probably lost on you. No wukkas, though.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Joe Howard</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:44:07 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3973</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Proving stuff</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3972</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Actually, anyone wishing to call something a "science" as Hubbard did with Scientology, BETTER be ready for scientific methodology to be applied to it, ie: falsification. Those who decry this are admitting that it ISN'T a science at all but, only a belief system.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Newer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:27:14 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3972</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Illegal IAS activities</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3925</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In addition to HCO PL "Exchange," and policies covering the HASI (which was the name of the membership organization that LRH established), go to "Knowledge Center" at the top of this page, then click "LRH References" from the drop down menu, then click on "What your fees buy": [censored]://www.scientology-cult.c om/knowledge-center/lrh-references/ 419-what-your-fees-buy.html Thoughtful]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thoughtful</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:29:03 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3925</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Proving stuff</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3924</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This article and the ones on Marty's and Jeff's blogs have ignited an interesting and passionate dialogue no question about it. Those demanding proof of the existence of OT abilities should first demand proof of more common [censored]enomena such as "love." Can they even present scientific proof that love exists? I don't know that science has ever demonstrated this, yet the person who does not know that love exists has yet to be born. Let's start by scientifically proving the existence of something that everybody knows before we dive into less common experiences. It will give us a good leg up on how to prove the existence of "OT abilities."]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Joe Howard</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 08:36:50 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3924</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3923</link>
			<description><![CDATA[My friend Thoughtful. A thought that occurs to me. On refection, a point in your suppression article that I would like some more info on is specifically, what LRH policies are being violated by the Church in the IAS fundraising? Can you email me the names and dates of those policies? You can send them to mimsey_borogrove@hushmail.com After reading your article, I am of the same mind, the CofS needs to have their ethics put in by getting them to pay for such polcy violations. I appreciate your time spent in this matter. MB]]></description>
			<dc:creator>mimsey borogrove</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 08:23:13 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3923</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3922</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Some of those "listings of OT abilities are HILARIOUS! Definitely posted by people with little education.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>IL</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:08:33 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3922</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3905</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I don't care for it because it's just wrong. You don't seem to know PTS/SP tech. Why don't you have a look at my earlier article before this one: "Throwing off suppression" where I lay out in detail WHO is the suppressive entity here. You don't seem to understand that an SP group IS a valid PTS item. You have this mixed up with an individual's responsibility for his own condition. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. The way a person goes PTS is by committing overts on the suppressive person (or group). How did you and Rex do that? By supporting them. By giving money to them. Each one of those acts was actually an overt act because the money was not being used to help clear the planet. Frankly, LRH outlawed all pure donation campaigns -- the IAS campaign is totally, utterly and 100% off policy and 100% out ethics. It was a mistake. Now that you've come to your senses, you've stopped supporting them. You stopped supporting them because it's an overt to support them. So yes, you are responsible for your own condition, and you also were PTS because you were connected without realizing it to a hostile, criminal organization -- the CoS. In 1990 COB made it clear down tech lines -- perhaps you don't know this, but I do -- that giving "good hats" as terminals in any PTS interview or PTS Rundown was not to be accepted. Who was defined as a "good hat"? COB and his protected few. So from that point on, COB and other key suppressive execs were immune to any ethics action that found them as valid PTS or SP terminals. So you really still don't get it: the whole of the Church is a suppressive group. They lie that they are all about "clearing the planet" when actually the money is being used by COB for a lavish lifestyle and he was NEVER actually using the money people donated for "dissemination campaigns." No, he was using it to live on and spending a small amount on mock dissemination campaigns to trick Scientologists into thinking their money was being well spent. Hey, have you ever seen an accounting for all the money? That's because it was not spent as promised. Gretchen, Hy, Annie, Howard, Michelle, Bennie -- every single one, every single staff member in the Sea Org or today in a Class V org for that matter IS a member of a suppressive group. While they are not suppressive individually, they ARE members of a suppressive group. What you don't get is the definition of a suppressive group. Do you think every single Nazi was a suppressive 2 1/2 percenter? They weren't. Many were just ordinary people drafted into an army, handed a gun and told to shoot! If they weren't brutal, guess who got shot? They did. So they killed and murdered. They had to follow orders. And it's the same in the Church today. Gretchen, Hy, all of us, were following orders. And those orders became gradiently suppressive. And thus the group itself became suppressive. That's how a suppressive group evolves. Read that article and then get back to me, "Throwing off suppression." I'd like to know what you think. It explains this whole situation in greater detail. Every single person in the CoS IS, IS, IS flamingly PTS. It's been intentionally overlooked. Why do you think you were BROKE? Does that sound like a good condition to be in? You are moving up the Bridge and you are "broke"... Mimsey, that doesn't even make any sense. If you are moving up the Bridge in a safe environment, you ought to be more prosperous, with more money in the bank. The whole reason you were "broke" is because you were being ripped off by a criminal organization -- extortion! If the mafia were busting into your office and holding a gun to your forehead and stealing your money, wouldn't that qualify as being "connected to a suppressive person or group"? It's no different with the CoS. But instead of a gun, they use the misapplication of heavy ethics -- insinuating you are out ethics if you won't give them everything, telling you lies about the state of the world and how they are handling it. Hey, David Miscavige spent your money on new motorcycles, vacations, houses, $500 Egyptian shirts, zebra wood paneling in his $70 million office building where 10 people worked, a $30 million new "home for LRH" after LRH died (and after bulldozing the actual historic home where he lived at the Int base).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thoughtful</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 18:13:44 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3905</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3903</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi Thoughtful. I guess you didn't much care for my earlier response - it was never posted. So let me re[censored]rase it. I have no idea if you have been on 7, but there is a whole panoply of checks as part of the level. From flying ruds daily, bi-weekly c/sing, to all of the sec checking, fesing etc that occurs on the 6 mos checks to catch out PTS's. Personally I think it is too facile to blame it on the 500 lb gorilla - there is no who to address that will result in a handling. None of those people, Gretchen Schwartz, Hy Levy, Annie White, Howard Becker, Michelle and Bennie at Flag IAS or Reg dept. that are vaguely PTS or SP and yet those people and others are the ones who reged him. This isn't the 6 degrees of separation. Where is the who? I have given in excess of $200K to get on 7 and to the IAS and I didn't feel the need to shoot somebody. You have to remember, he agreed to give the money, and for a worthy cause - clearing the planet. Which is exactly what I thought when I signed checks to them, broke as I was. However much you try to not-is this, he is a product of 7. I could be equally facil and say he was dramatizing the level (not cause over life) but the fact still exists. My problem with the PTS tech is that it is 180 degrees of an earlier LRH stable datum, you are entirely responsible for your own condition. PTS tech says, in essence, somebody else is responsible for your bad behavior. Some sp, some 2 1/2 percenter, some out of valence in R-6 guy is messing with your life and so you make a lot of trouble. While there are no doubt people with SP characteristics out there, that does not justify Rex being trigger happy. Nor can you blame it on the entities the level handles either. If you are going to discuss the positive effects of the OT levels, you have to look at the negative as well. Otherwise you display your bias. MB]]></description>
			<dc:creator>mimsey borogrove</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 17:41:01 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3903</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3893</link>
			<description><![CDATA[No offense, but you seem to know less about Scientology than a bag of hammers. And that is putting it nicely. People who are connected to a suppressive person or group make trouble. That's why they are called "PTS" -- "Potential TROUBLE Source." A PTS situation has to be handled before one does any auditing, because auditing doesn't work on someone who is PTS. That's why I can safely say you don't know the first thing about Scientology. Rex Fowler was connected to a suppressive group: the CoS! They extorted $200,000 from him that he didn't have. So he was most definitely raging PTS. Any individual must police their own connections if they want to be free or able. Rex Fowler didn't do it. So that's where the OTness was: there wasn't any because this idiot didn't apply Scientology to his own life. He had a 500 pound leach sucking blood out of his neck and this idiot didn't smash the leach. This may come as a big surprise to you, but LRH developed the PTS/SP tech for use... as in, you are supposed to apply it to your life because if you don't, you will lose your gains and it will be as if you never got any auditing at all. Fowler didn't apply PTS/SP tech. The purpose of Ethics is to get in Tech. If Ethics is out, Tech won't go in. Here's another way of putting it: You can't grow tomatoes in solid stone. And you can't engender "OTness" in yourself if you are heavily PTS. It's a technical fact. Here's what a real OT would have to do in Rex Fowler's position: throw off the SP. If he had done that, his OTness would have been shining and his partner would still be alive.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thoughtful</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2011 02:25:01 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3893</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3892</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ok, I have a question. This is not a joke or 1.1 comment. How do you explain OT 7 Rex Fowler murdering his business partner? He was solo auditing on 7, something I have done. He had the all solo tech to fly his rudes, use correction lists etc. under his belt, he had the whole of the ethics and admin tech and axioms and everything else scientology has to offer to aid him in handling his partner with the whole OT case gains he had gained from doing the entire bridge. Why then did he have to shoot his business partner? And turn the gun on himself? Where is the OTness being demonstrated here? MB]]></description>
			<dc:creator>mimsey borogrove</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:43:41 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3892</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3891</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I loved your article. I believe the biggest relief I had getting out of the church was realizing I could be OT without having to spend thousands of dollars doing it. It's actually quite depressing to go to the examiner and be floating and then hit the reg and have them tell you "you still have a long way to go" Of all the things, this was the worst one I ever encountered. And the reason? Because it wasn't true. If I constantly think "I can't be cause over life until I'm OT VII" then that's how it's going to be! Because I get what I put my attention on and that's OT to me. I just had to stop agreeing with the reg's and the sups and get the hell out of there!!!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Summer Wind</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:29:28 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3891</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Flying teapots....</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3890</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Steve, Once again, you have taken a complex subject and laid it out on the table in a simple way. This is one of the best explanations of "OT" that I've ever heard or seen. Thanks. There are, of course, some who won't "see" it, shrug.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Eileen</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 23:29:05 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3890</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3889</link>
			<description><![CDATA[For those who seem to feel they were promised the power to move teapots, and this promise was not delivered upon, I can understand the frustration. It has been my personal consideration that prior to moving a teapot, it behoves me to know what a teapot is. What exactly is matter, energy, space, time? Seems to me that to gain a skill in handling something, even the skill of telekinesis, one would have to know what it was, how it worked, what was the 'tele' and how does 'kinesis' work. I can't move a teapot - yet - but I'm sure enough gaining a real grasp on time and space and working on energy and matter. Theoretically, with the assumption points of the Qs, the Factors, the Axioms, extrapolations would lead to pushing a pen around with an apparent lack of contact (apparent is used advisedly as in order to have any motion translate, there must be some contact, at some level. Theta must bridge over to theta as MEST. How? Again, one of those prerequisite understandings to actual skill, else, what is it one is practicing?) I'd ask one who felt he didn't get his efforts worth out of his Scientology, what for example is 'time'. Really. You can't define it to your own satisfaction that you know precisely what it is you experience everytime you wake up, then how on any plane, could you expect to be 'cause' over that which you don't actually understand as a working fact? That is a puzzle to me. Time on the other hand LRH, in Scientology, covered but thoroughly.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jim Logan</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 21:41:34 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3889</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Flying teapost and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3888</link>
			<description><![CDATA[[censored]://www.youtube.com/watch? v=mLUICPT4qBA Steven Pinker, on free will, no soul in the machine, and the [censored]one interview covers some great points. [censored]://www.youtube.com/watch? v=fI1624SwYnI&feature=related from BBC show, shows brain activity building up, before we exercise free will. These arguments in these clips were sufficient for me, to allow me to revert to thinking we aren't invisible souls which blanket our brains and pull the levers on our brains initiating brain activity. I believe we are as laid out by Pinker, in the above clip, and there are many other great clips of Pinker on Youtube.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Chuck Beatty</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 19:21:06 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3888</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3885</link>
			<description><![CDATA[That really was amazing! Thank you! :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Tara</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:52:55 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3885</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3884</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi Caliwog, I'm not sure what point you are making. The transmission is both force of will and electrochemical. Are you just trying to prove people are not spirits? Sorry if I have misunderstood your point.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thoughtful</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:00:37 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3884</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3883</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Steve, I'm not sure if you get the object of that experiment. I don't think that changes the part you have left out, i.e. the transmission of signals between the brain and the muscle. It's still an electrochemical process. Not force of will. ML, Caliwog]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Caliwog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Mar 2011 12:30:38 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3883</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3882</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thoughtful, I think you may have missed the point of the experiment, at the same point that your brain-to-arm meta[censored]or breaks down. ML, Caliwog]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Caliwog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Mar 2011 11:19:40 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3882</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Flying teapots and parlor tricks</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3880</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Brilliant Steve. Thanks for taking the time to lay it out so clearly. Mlv Klaus]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Klaus</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 19 Mar 2011 16:00:23 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3880</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Great, but just a few points.</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3877</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I really enjoyed your article, it clarified a few things in my mind. Just a few arguements you may consider: 1. I had noticed the Church of Miscavology down-defining OT into someone who can "make it go right," and not someone who can "make teapots fly." I've listened to the PDCs too and Ron was talking about some pretty high level stuff when he was discussing OT, not just "Community Organizers." I believe the "make it go right" sort of OTness is the gradient up to "teapots" but is not the goal itself. 2. I disagree that it would be bad to display parlor tricks. Sure, some types of "parlor tricks" might be too much for people to tolerate or could be destructive to others. But I think most people would love to see real magic and it would inspire them to reach OT themselves. In fact I believe it is the key to making the tech real to everyone. I think that the fear of punishment we think will follow the use of OT tricks is part of the implant that keeps us from using them and is a sign that someone hasn't made it to full OT.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>ClearlyMistreated</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 23:19:47 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3877</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mostly loved it</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3876</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Amazingly well-written. I did have to agree with SpecialFrog that to someone who believes in their soul, but not as something independent of their body unless acted upon by their god, tracking back gets to them - but not to a Thetan external to MEST. (The common Christian believes they are either an alive body or a dead body and once dead God can act to bring them to heaven or send them to hell. Many even think of themselves in their bodies in those heaven or hell.) The only other minor point that I'd quibble with is that a floating teapot at Applebee's would not have the final effect unless more was done. The universe tends to invalidate such events. (Maybe the cup had a magnet, a fine wire, slid due to a streak of water, etc.) Agreement that it happened would be very very low. However, neither of those points is critical - simply ones that stand out a little to a reader who wants to find something to quibble about. (Meaning I've just insulted myself, I know.)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Random Person</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 20:06:22 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3876</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: RE: RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3875</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Caliwog, I doubt Steve is saying any such thing. The muscles contract because of the impulses carried by the nerves. This is obvious - you can insert needles into a rat's brain and make it's muscles move as you wish with the correct amount of current applied to the right place. These days we can even make devices to help disabled people using the same principles - I've read of prosthetic limbs being wired directly into brains. Neurology is perfectly valid in this regard. Nerves carry impulses because neurons fire in ways that cause the impulse. The neurons fire because that's what they do. But why do they fire in exactly the way they do? It sure isn't random - you can lift your arm on demand whenever you want. So it's determinate. I believe Steve is saying it's the being (the "thetan") that triggers the process by making the neurons fire. This is the point where the life-force (or spirit if you will) interacts most intimately with the body. Which makes sense - personally I think it's rather stupid trying to make my arm go up and down all by itself when there's a perfectly good servo system already in place, complete with feedback loops and all the other engineering goodness that makes for an efficient machine.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>splog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 18:24:01 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3875</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Now that's what should be happening</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3874</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So many thoughts on this, Steve. 1) Yes it can reform Scientology. It's supposed to be able to. It requires us to think, decide, act -- which is the definition of ability, well demonstrated here. 2) This should be a whole series of intro or Sunday services in the Church. I mean, what is Scientology about but this? Implicit in your prose, is the concept that at least one goal is the better game scenario. I can also see the observations that an individual must have a game and that that game may be fun, may not be fun. 3) I am gonna start using the expression when tea pots fly. It will be your cause. By definition it will me when better, appropriate circumstances prevail. It will also imply there are not too many folks saying it can't happen or that it should be proven. Bruce]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Fellow Traveller</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:33:24 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3874</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: RE: RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3873</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi Caliwog, Great question. In 2003, scientists working with patients who had lost a limb found that by placing a tiny "brush" of antennas in the brain (a kind of tiny Fuller brush with rows of tiny gold hairs which do not damage the cells) and connecting these antennas to a robotic arm, they could enable the patient to control a robotic arm like they did a real arm. Pick up stuff, whatever. They don't understand it all yet because they don't know Scientology. But the fact is, the thetan "thinks" or projects a mock up through the brain and the brain (which is just itself a receptor) picks up the sweep of imagery across it, which is converted into electric impulses that move the arm. In other words, they simply successfully replicated what the body itself is doing. The brain (a 3-D antenna) catches signals from a mock up projected by the thetan across it, converting that into signals that travel through the nerves (wires) to the arm's muscles (motors). I believe they will find as they research this further, that for most people, the being (spirit) mocks up a 3D picture of an arm moving as they want, and the brain reads this and converts it into signals that move the arm. What supports this is experiments whereby the same scientists implanted the little golden brush into someone's brain and recorded the signals as he "thought" about moving his arm. They found the signal pattern was the same every time for the same motion, and corresponded identically to the motion. The signal pattern was just as if something swept across that little brush in the same direction for any given motion. In other words, if you imagine moving your arm from left to right, the signal pattern across the little brush went from left to right. Think your arm up, and the signal pattern went from bottom to top. It turned out to be stupidly easy, exactly as LRH said the mind worked in the 1950s if you want to delve into his lectures. They are fascinating talks, I assure you. In these lectures the secrets of the universe are revealed, no shit. Thus these hearty scientists are delving into the field of mentally activated devices, or actually, they are creating an interface with the express people so that paralyzed people can one day do things -- like drive a car or fly a plane -- using their minds directly instead of having to move a stick with their hand. Of course the military already got hold of this and has developed ways a pilot can fly a plane using only his mind. They've already done it. But of course controlling things with the mind is a two way street. And thus there is a darker side we must be alert for. If the mind can control a computer, the potential is there for the computer to influence the mind. Hence the vital necessity to make Scientology broadly known since it is the only thing that has the technology capable of preventing or undoing these kinds of control mechanisms. As LRH wrote about many times in the 1950s and afterward, Scientology is a race between freedom and slavery. That's just another reason some people care so much about Scientology (the [censored]iloso[censored]y not the Church) and will never give up teaching about it. In the wrong hands, Scientology is deadly. The only way to protect people is to make sure EVERYONE has the knowledge and thus the antidote: then we can all protect ourselves. As LRH said, Scientology is a deadly serious activity. That's why so many of us endured unbelievable hardships at the Int base and elsewhere if you want to know the truth, and gave so much money and support to the activity, not knowing it had been subverted by the rotten apple at the top; and even why now, outside we are acting to make sure the technology stays free. We understand the risks and what is at stake and we've drawn a line in the sand and I can assure you we will move heaven and earth to create that good future for mankind. The forces that would misuse technology to enslave mankind have already lost. They just don't know it yet.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thoughtful</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:12:14 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3873</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3871</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thoughtful, just to clarify - so are you saying that electrical impulses from our brain, which cause the muscle fibers to contract, are NOT the reason that we lift the salt-shaker? That our arm comes up simply because we will it to come up? ML, Caliwog]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Caliwog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:30:28 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3871</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: RE: RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3869</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I'm totally tracking with you and I loved your insight into molecular cohesion. And of course you are right about the futility of proving a theory of consciousness to someone who has accepted different axioms. LRH suggested more broadly, the only proof of anything lies in it's workability. To me, I do believe that is the acid test. So in regarding any theory, I look to see if it is useful. Can I do anything with it? Does it unlock any doors? If not, for me, I throw it aside into the junk pile of the "unworkable" and therefore "untrue." Perhaps that is because I subscribe to an axiom that truth unlocks doors. So when I get a theory that sounds nice but it won't unlock anything, or in reverse seems to make things even more incomprehensible, I say that it fails the acid test of "truth" because it fails the any test of workability. The reason I endorse the seniority of life above the structure of the universe is because it enables me to do things I couldn't do before. When I was in college, my cosmology (the science of the origin and development of the universe) professor told me about the theory he was currently working on. I asked him if his theory was true. He told me, "Well, actually it doesn't matter if it is true. It only matters that you have your own theory. If you have a theory, then you can get a grant to study it. And you can write a book about it." That is literally what he said and at that point I was done with college. This fool was promoting a theory that he knew wasn't true just so he could make a buck. That happened at Southern Methodist University in 1979. I left college and started looking elsewhere for "truth." When LRH placed the standard of workability alongside his theories, and said workability is the only valid standard by which you can know truth, it made a lot of sense. Thanks for writing. Steve]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thoughtful</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:02:14 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3869</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: Sour grapes</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3868</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, I read those same definitions and they not only work for me, I think they are apt and 100% useful. I am not redefining anything.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thoughtful</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:42:30 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3868</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Sour grapes</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3867</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What is true for you is true for you, and if gets you where you want to go and keeps your universe in order I say thats great. You have your opinion regarding what an OT is and what it means to you and you expressed it publicly. I am just going off of the many definitions of what an OT is out of the Tech Dictionary and what LRH described as OT ablities in his numerous lectures from 1952 to 1962. You didn't like it but I thank you for leaving my comment up for others to read instead of deleting it, and I thank you for your reply which almost seems to be longer than your article and very passionate. I thank you for what you think LRH's thoughts where on why he decided to live in bluebird bus the 6 months to a year of his life. I don't know why he finally ended up there, or why he had a stroke about a week before he died, or why he had ten needle marks in his buttock where his personal doctor had been giving him the drug Vistrial. I guess we could ask Pat Broeker or Dr. Denk who was there. I am sure we could justify it or be reasonable about it. Maybe I don't know what an OT is or what you believe an OT is, but I think I might have a pretty good idea what it isn't according to LRH's own definitions.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jim Little</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:25:35 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3867</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3865</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi Thoughtful, Thanks for the clarification. I guess the issue I have is that it is only a proof if you except the idea that matter is caused by "the fundamental agreements of life" as a fact, which most non-Scientologists are not going to do. I'm perfectly happy with all you've said as a belief or a theory of consciousness but it can't be proven to someone who has accepted different axioms. A mathematical parallel is the continuum hypothesis which was put forth by a respected mathematician and then it was later found literally impossible to prove or to disprove. You can assume it to be true and have one branch of mathematics or assume it to be false and have another. Both can produce useful results but they can't relate to each other in many cases.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>SpecialFrog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:59:40 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3865</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3864</link>
			<description><![CDATA[SpecialFrog, It's not an issue with logic but my own failure to explain my point clearly. The concept in Scientology is more that matter behaves as it does because we, as spiritual beings, set up the basic agreements that result in the [censored]ysical laws monitoring the behavior of matter, energy, space and time. Chemical bonds are not the cause of matter's behavior. The fundamental agreements of life as to how matter behaves -- that is the causal element. Sorry I didn't make that clear. In referring to "stupid" ones, I was not about people asking pertinent questions in an effort to understand. I'm talking about those who take comfort in shooting others down with ignorant arguments.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thoughtful</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:40:10 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3864</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sour grapes</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3863</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, Jim you are both right and wrong. People who are PTS (connected to a suppressive person) DON'T GET GAINS from auditing. You didn't get any. Same with "everyone" from St Louis and your lady friend "in the woods." But that doesn’t prove auditing doesn’t work. It proves “everyone” who didn’t get any gains was connected the whole time to a suppressive person or group. Let’s see who could that be? Ah gee, I can’t think of anyone. Of course there IS the Church of Scientology. I’ve heard tell they are pretty suppressive and have even been known to rip people off. No, no. No, no, no. It couldn’t be them. It MUST be that all the tech is wrong. Yep, that makes sense. LRH was wrong because he didn’t mind living in a Bluebird motor home. Why do I get the idea that even if I repeated the above 100 times you'd still blame your own failure to get any gains on the tech, rather than on your connection to a suppressive group? I'm also glad to know that you are the official bully, I mean, judge of who's OT in the St Louis field. You certainly sound qualified for the job since you don't even know what the word means. I would never suggest that you are a product of reverse Scientology because you violated your own integrity and gave $400,000 to Charles Manson, I mean David Miscavige. I would never say that you caused your own problems by violating your own integrity. I would not em[censored]asize that no one else did that to you; YOU did it to yourself. You elected to become a victim by ignoring your better judgment and ignoring your own voice in the matter. You didn't keep your own council. And now you refuse to take responsibility for your own actions because you didn’t get any gains because you were connected to a suppressive group the whole time. I'd never say any of that because I think you have every right to spew confusion and false data in all directions. I'd never say all you are doing now is mocking what you never understood in the first place and playing the victim card. And I'd certainly never say that YOU are hiding out in the woods just like your lady friend. What are you hiding from? Responsibility. And the definition of OT. Because after giving away $400,000 I guess it's just easier to negate responsibility for everything. So you take succor blaming me personally, and LRH -- what, because he didn't care if he lived in a motor home instead of a mansion like David Miscavige? WTF!?! I'm not defending Miscavige, he's a crook. But Miscavige wasn't the one who -- against his better judgment -- reached into his own pocket and handed over $400,000 to pack of liars. Thanks for spitting your sour, rotten, stinking grapes in my face but you know I'm going to pass on eating any myself. And as for your salt shaker remark, you know Jim, I don't want to invalidate anyone, but huh, actually a real OT might want to move beyond the delirious pleasure of moving salt shakers and do something on a broader scale. If you don't want any help with that, I'm certainly not insisting or charging anyone for the advice I'm handing out for free. You can operate as a thetan or you can operate as a meat body. Do whatever you want. But I'm just saying for those who want to improve their ability to operate as a thetan, the door is wide open because despite your proclamations, outside the CoS the tech works GREAT. If you don't like that, get off of my cloud. Miscavige has no greater enemy than me. But I'm not going after him because I'm a professional victim (and any similarities of that word to anyone living or drunk is purely a coincidence). I'm going after him because he's a blight on the life force of mankind. It’s good, Jim, that you have spoken out about the abuses of the Church. But that doesn't mean that you are any kind of authority on the subject of OT. You know less about OT than Flipper. And actually, if I needed a consultant on the matter, I’d go to Flipper first before you. Except that he’s dead. So instead I’ll just have to observe life for myself and have the courage to state what I’ve observed, despite any bullying from you. Here’s some more free advice: You are on safe ground as long as you stick to exposing crimes. But if you want to belittle me or the tech? I'm going to point out you have an anger management issue. And that anger has one source: your refusal to spot the exact time and place you first violated your own integrity as you slipped into hands of the CoS, which in turn allowed you to be ripped off. Don't bully me because you can't confront your own causation.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thoughtful</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 11:36:32 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3863</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3862</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thank you for your wonderful and delightfully expressed point of view. My tone level just went up 1.25 points.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Samuel C</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 11:06:51 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3862</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3861</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thoughtful: Interesting article but there are a few issues with your logic. Just because moving my arm to lift a salt-shaker requires a conscious act on my part it doesn't prove that this consciousness is in any way separable from my body. Additionally, the existence of chemical bonds between atoms doesn't require a consciousness to hold things together. Why would our bodies behave any differently than other matter in this regards? There are microscopic creatures that live in water that aren't strong enough to break the bonds between water molecules so the water is essentially solid for them. We're stronger so it isn't but other substances with stronger bonds are.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>SpecialFrog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 10:30:57 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3861</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Kudos</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3859</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Wonderful post, Thoughtful. I couldn't agree more. And would just like to add: To experience this light-hearted view of life for oneself, study the tech of L. Ron Hubbard (original source material, please - not MisCabbage-altered) with the purpose of applying it to improve conditions for oneself and others (as you so obviously have) and, viola! such an experience of life (and of OT) emerges.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>40 Year Scientologist</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 05:13:52 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3859</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RE: Deconstructing OT</title>
			<link>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3858</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Great article, Steve. It says all there is to say about scientology!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Li Po</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:26:55 -0600</pubDate>
			<guid>https://mail.scientology-cult.com/flying-teapots-and-parlor-tricks.html#comment-3858</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
