Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: mathew@jane.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Mathew Yeates)
Subject: Re: Indoctrination [was My opinion...]
Message-ID: <1991Jul21.210102.15695@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
Summary: Lets investigate 
Sender: news@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Usenet)
Nntp-Posting-Host: jane.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Image Analysis Systems Group, JPL
References: <17114@life.ai.mit.edu> <2888E8A0.1144@ics.uci.edu> <34456@usc.edu>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 91 21:01:02 GMT

In article <34456@usc.edu> lfreeman@phad.hsc.usc.edu (Leny Freeman) writes:
>In Scientology something is true for you if you observe it for
>yourself.  That is one of the basic tenets.  

And this is not Science. Science is public and what you're talking about
is private experience. 

Another experiment:
Please reiterate any of the claims regarding the benefits of Dianetics.
Considering these claims to be hypotheses about the effects of Dianetics,
I ask that they be testable, verifiable, most importantly, that they be
hypotheses which could be contradicted by some evidence if, in fact,
they were not true. (That Dianetics improves vision is a good one but
we know how that one turned out)

For each claim answer, "What evidence would prove to you that the claim
is false". If you can't answer this I can only conclude that you are
interested in something other than the question of the truthfulness
of the claim.

(Anticipating your response) It is immaterial whether I am, or am not,
skeptical about these claims. Unless "bad vibes" will ruin the
experiment.

The tenet Leny mentions seems to me a cop-out. It avoids any serious
investigation by saying "If you find the claims to be false then they
are false for you". No duh.

-mathew