Search results

I get the distinct impression that anyone who had their head so far up their own arse that they would need such a command probably couldn't run it anyhow. This is convoluted complexity in extremus. A case that messed up probably needs 100 hours of objectives, not a meter.

Yes. The 1963 Super Tech PDF is full of such words. When I wrote the above I hadn't yet seen that, since the HCOBs it contains were restricted and not published in the red volumes.

Not in the text, and I can't put my finger on the reference right at this moment. It may have been in the tape he made at Larry West's centre. Still a bit vague for me. I get that he's not limiting or restricting the scope of the command in any way. And it certainly doesn't help make sense of...

Filbert describes nix as a stronger version of not that existed in some ancient languages. My complaint doesn't originate from misundestanding the words used, but the redundancy and complexity of some auditing commands.

That was really odd. My copy of that 18 June lecture had the intro section totally omitted, it went from LRH giving the date to a point 10 minutes in, completely missing the data about line plots. I have a second version in which it is there. I'm going to have to compare the two since the one...

Thanks, that helps further orientation into the data set of the period. Some time soon I plan to go through the whole SHSBC again in light of this new information / viewpoint. As many old timers will attest, there is some value still untapped in the actual GPM research. Yes, SC-18 is dated...

Dunno about that. I remember watching that cheezy Japanese monster movie called Mothra. There's a point where one of the scientists bursts into the room and proclaims, "I have discovered the monster's name. His name is ... GIDRA!" And we all sort of went, "Yeah, so what?"

Hiya Is-Be. No, those lectures are not available to the public. Filbert was on that project, and he remembers it as 65-66 BUT I know a Class VIII who was doing his course at that time and he neither saw or knew of it. I can only assume that Filbert's memory of the exact year was faulty, which...

In short: Now that I can see where this goes, I'll do a complete review of all actions to date, then complete the original pre-OT levels OT IV to OT VII. At that point I'll take another look and see if things seem the same as they are now. If so, I plan to come up with processes that handle any...

No, Mike only does Idenics. I wrote it myself, to avoid C/Sing in the chair.

Thanks Hatshepsut - who nailed the exact data from the tape, because she's a very smart cookie - and to Ed8 for his interesting commentary. Not a lot of NOPE happening around here right now. I just used the Quantum meter for the first time, to do a CS53RM and handle my high TA situation. Pulled...

That's entirely correct. I'm upgrading you to an Is-Be. After all, nostalgia ain't what it used to be. Now, I'm OT III so the primary implants (Level V) are handled. Level VI (handling actual GPMs) was keyed out recently by my new process of 21 Feb (this thread) as modified with an extra step...

I could tell you about it Veda, but then I'd have to kill you. Although with these tedious info dumps of irrelevant information, I may just do that anyhow.

It was on a confidential tape, so you'll have to find it yourself. 6502C23

As of a few days ago I am absolutely sure I know what the CoS OT IX will consist of. The answers were right there in the SHSBC in 1965 but never expanded upon by LRH. My Idenics session touched on the edges of it and this got me away and researching the answer. I have also known personally...

Well, maybe not clearing, but certainly by the time one is OT, yes. The trouble is that there are no actual OT levels available. I know how to make a postulate stick. Here's my one ...

Yes, it was. I had to lay down anchor points for the session to make sense of it afterwards, it handled some very OT matters. In fact I wish I'd had the presence of mind to record it. Mike has offered to complete the session, gratis. He says he has a soft spot for old Scientologists. We got on...

Idenics session went off on time (2:00am my time). After a few minutes of faffing about so that the sound came through my headphones and not the speakers, we got down to it. Mike delivered his standard C/S-1 which simply outlines the need to look rather than think, and we were off to the races...

Identities, entities, players, pieces. It's all allegory to me. You say to-may-to, I say to-mah-to. Glad I was aligned well enough to supply the needed data. :)

In 2011 I bought a copy of the Idenics book from Mike Goldstein. I recently remembered that he offers a demo session by Skype so I've booked it for Friday. Should be interesting. www.freezoneplanet.org BTW I like the way this discussion is evolving.