Is Captain David Miscavige’s Claim of 6601 Sea Org Members Real? Or Are There Far Fewer?

..

That's exactly what it is. If we put the org there exactly like LRH said it should be and if we do exactly what he said made St. Hill boom then we too will magically boom. They don't step back and analyze what made St. Hill boom and then try to copy that (they can't). They have to follow what LRH says to do with no critical thinking or analysis. If they spent five minutes analyzing things they'd see that St. Hill had many advantages that todays Class V orgs don't have and will never have, so what worked for St. Hill won't necessarily work for Class V orgs. Also the bottom line is they are selling a crap product (Scientology). If you have a good/desirable product than almost anything you do will be successful. If your product is bad then no amount of marketing or organization will overcome that, maybe in the short term you can do some stuff and create a boom, but in the long term you'll fail.

.
Oh my! The Hubbardites, despite boasting of their ultra-advanced technology, are then actually using a goofy brand of ultra-primitive mimicry.

The Modern Science of Cargo Cults! (more info at Britannica)

The most widely known period of cargo cult activity occurred among the Melanesian islanders in the years during and after World War II. A small population of indigenous peoples observed, often directly in front of their dwellings, the largest war ever fought by technologically advanced nations. The Japanese distributed goods and used the beliefs of the Melanesians to attempt to gain their compliance.[5] Later the Allied forces arrived in the islands.
The vast amounts of military equipment and supplies that both sides airdropped (or airlifted to airstrips) to troops on these islands meant drastic changes to the lifestyle of the islanders, many of whom had never seen outsiders before. Manufactured clothing, medicine, canned food, tents, weapons and other goods arrived in vast quantities for the soldiers, who often shared some of it with the islanders who were their guides and hosts. This was true of the Japanese Army as well, at least initially before relations deteriorated in most regions.
The John Frum cult, one of the most widely reported and longest-lived, formed on the island of Tanna, Vanuatu. This movement started before the war, and became a cargo cult afterwards. Cult members worshiped certain unspecified Americans having the name "John Frum" or "Tom Navy" who they claimed had brought cargo to their island during World War II and whom they identified as being the spiritual entity who would provide cargo to them in the future.[7]
Postwar developments
With the end of the war, the military abandoned the airbases and stopped dropping cargo. In response, charismatic individuals developed cults among remote Melanesian populations that promised to bestow on their followers deliveries of food, arms, Jeeps, etc. The cult leaders explained that the cargo would be gifts from their own ancestors, or other sources, as had occurred with the outsider armies.[8]
In attempts to get cargo to fall by parachute or land in planes or ships again, islanders imitated the same practices they had seen the military personnel use. Cult behaviors usually involved mimicking the day-to-day activities and dress styles of US soldiers, such as performing parade ground drills with wooden or salvaged rifles.[9] The islanders carved headphones from wood and wore them while sitting in fabricated control towers. They waved the landing signals while standing on the runways. They lit signal fires and torches to light up runways and lighthouses.[10][better source needed]
In a form of sympathetic magic, many built life-size replicas of airplanes out of straw and cut new military-style landing strips out of the jungle, hoping to attract more airplanes.[11] The cult members thought that the foreigners had some special connection to the deities and ancestors of the natives, who were the only beings powerful enough to produce such riches.
Cargo cults were typically created by individual leaders, or big men in the Melanesian culture, and it is not at all clear if these leaders were sincere, or were simply running scams on gullible populations. The leaders typically held cult rituals well away from established towns and colonial authorities, thus making reliable information about these practices very difficult to acquire.[12]
...
 
Last edited:
I did a head count on that photo and came up with less than 12,000,000. But in all fairness I would want to give Scientology the benefit of the doubt in case that many of the attendees were temporarily on a bathroom break our outside smoking Kools.

I think they are off to a splendid start, because they have a very nice TENT. Kind of like a revival tent, ain't it?!

All they need now is a large inventory of blessed prayer cloths that are free when you donate. And they also need a dozen or so strong parishioners on stage to catch those who lined up for their miracle and fall backwards when slapped in the forehead sharply with the command "HEALEDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!"

And oh yeah, an organist who can play triumphant flourishes every time a random believer in the audience screams out things like "RON JUST HEALED MY SUGAR DIABETES, PRAISE THE LORD!"

ps: if none of that makes planetary clearing a reality, we'll be forced to bring out the poisonous snakes for next Sunday's sermon.

.
Remember…. Scientology photo shops and “dubs in “ people to create the smoke and mirrors magical gaslighting effect


This Week's Bad Photoshopping Lesson Comes From Scientology

(Mis)Uses of Technology

from the the-thetans-did-it dept
Thu, May 16th 2013 04:01pm - Timothy Geigner
The universe has a sense of humor. I’m convinced of it. See, as someone who believes that humor is a wonderful way to deal with otherwise disheartening topics, I’m amazed at how often the world around me will give me something to laugh at when I’m feeling blue. Take the world’s current climate on the topic of religion, for instance. It’d be very easy to get down in the dumps over the Westboro Baptist Church, religious fundamentalists engaging in acts of terror, and the never-ending saga known as the Middle East “peace” process. None of those things are laughing matters. But then, reading the forlorn expression on my face, the universe sends me another story from the Church of Scientology.
The Tom-Cruise-iest religion on the planet took a break from their attempt to destroy free speech to celebrate the grand-mega opening of their new ironically named Ideal Organization in Portland by producing the worst photoshopped picture this side of the Iranian military.
The crowd was around 450-750 people. But the church claims it was more like 2,500, and it Photoshopped in the proof. Except the proof is about as convincing as your thetan’s origin story. In reality, there were no people in the right-hand side of the photo. There was actually a line of rented trees set up to block the view of people not so friendly to Scientology (see the photo below), as well as police blocking off a four-block radius for the event. And it’s not just that the picture was doctored, it’s that it was done quite poorly. They added people right on top of the trees in the altered section.


So a word of friendly advice to my Scientologist friends: brainwashed graphic designers are a better asset than brainwashed Tom Cruises. For ever and ever. Amen.
Filed Under: exaggeration, photography, photoshop, scientology
Companies: scientology


1661909407207.jpeg
1661909439957.jpeg
 
Last edited:
i want to link this to some other discussion of numbers that i think is essential:


so they're claiming nearly 8k Super Power comps -- and that's a stat that's only been accumulating for about a decade (and is still subject to some questions about inflation, like counting people who've done it multiple times) and as i understand it is open to anyone.

i figure that if you assume most of the diehards around Flag and Big Blue who take advanced services there and have little if anything to do with local orgs, have completed Super Power, then maybe 5k of their completions are from people who've really come from local orgs. and that would translate to about 35 people per local org, over the last 10 years, who have had the dedication and wherewithal to make it to 'mecca' and partake in the CoS' one really new service introduction since OT8.

how can the staffing numbers be very high in any other part of the CoS, if that's all the members they can get on a course like Super Power? and, i still think it's bizarrely out of whack, if they even have 3k sea org when the pool of really active members with financial means is only double or triple that.
 
i want to link this to some other discussion of numbers that i think is essential:


so they're claiming nearly 8k Super Power comps -- and that's a stat that's only been accumulating for about a decade (and is still subject to some questions about inflation, like counting people who've done it multiple times) and as i understand it is open to anyone.

i figure that if you assume most of the diehards around Flag and Big Blue who take advanced services there and have little if anything to do with local orgs, have completed Super Power, then maybe 5k of their completions are from people who've really come from local orgs. and that would translate to about 35 people per local org, over the last 10 years, who have had the dedication and wherewithal to make it to 'mecca' and partake in the CoS' one really new service introduction since OT8.

how can the staffing numbers be very high in any other part of the CoS, if that's all the members they can get on a course like Super Power? and, i still think it's bizarrely out of whack, if they even have 3k sea org when the pool of really active members with financial means is only double or triple that.

Some orgs will have more than 35, some less, but I think that sounds about right. Maybe even a little on the high side. Kind of puts things in perspective about how small they're getting.

I don't know how hard the SO has been hit in recent years, they might still be able to count 5K+ SO members, I think it's Class V staff that has been hit super hard. Staff always has more attrition, they don't sign lifetime contracts so they always have more trouble keeping Class V staff. They treat them like crap and then when it comes time to re-sign their contract they obviously don't.

I think one of the crises Scientology is currently facing is Class V staff. We're seeing evidence of this with more and more orgs being manned by SO members. They don't have an endless pool to recruit from and they're getting to the point where many Scientologists have already done a stint in the SO or on Staff, and I'm sure many of them have no wish to repeat it. Scientology shooting itself in the foot as usual.
 
some of the orgs in big cities have CFs in the ballpark of 100k, partly as the result of absorbing defunct missions. that's got to be how they get to claims of 'millions'.

i think i've heard Chris Shelton cite the master mailing list at some management org in LA being around a quarter million, which i think would fit with the number of people who have ever held an IAS membership.

my reality check is to consider that of the 140 or so local orgs, all the current photographic evidence is that most can't get even 100 people to show up for their largest gatherings. accounting for a few thousand people in LA and CW served exclusively by higher level orgs, i think that puts the realistic active membership around 15k, if even that now.

parsing some of the CoS claims, i suspect they have about 30k current IAS members, probably many of those people who bought lifetime memberships long ago but are no longer active.
you have to realize that Hubbard said in a Policy Letter that a org's or mission's CF was a gold mine, one needed to just write letters to the CF, or central files or individuals who responded to a promo piece. And one needed to constantly write letters to this person who showed some interest. It is also keep promoting by any means.

"the state of wanting to know or learn about something or someone" This is why Hubbard said to keep letters out, and also keep promo out on the org board. On the org board of a org or mission is dissemination. It later turned into promoting via TV commercials and now the internet.

What I quote is also the mystery sandwich Hubbard told about in the marketing series OEC's, which is what Jefferson Hawkins did in the commercials of long ago, this is a bad reproduction but true:

Dianetics - L. Ron Hubbard - Tv commercial - 1987 - YouTube

The policy letter on getting Central files up to date is why DM promoted it to get done. Only a staff member who read Hubbards Marketing Series, PR series and OEC's would know this. High classed auditors wouldn't know this, outsiders would not know this, general staff would not know this.
 
Last edited:
you have to realize that Hubbard said in a Policy Letter that a org's or mission's CF was a gold mine, one needed to just write letters to the CF, or central files or individuals who responded to a promo piece.

i get that.

and i suspect it's one of those things that actually worked to some extent in the '50s and '60s, and when many of those contacts were fairly fresh, and the number files small -- plus, of course, in a different era when writing letters was much more of a thing. but now it's one of those things that the CoS keeps on doing even though it long ago ceased to work the way it once did, and is now a waste of time (and resources) or even counter-productive. it would be like Sears, which was originally built on mail order, never having stopped printing up and mailing out thick catalogs, and relying on them to produce sales.

plus, as i've noted before, from accounts they do occasionally get some business from letters out. it's probably about as rare as hen's teeth now, and still not effective in any sort of rational analysis, but still some anecdotal feedback to spur them on to keep trying the same thing in hopes of getting the results that they used to.

s-l1600.jpg


this is an interesting reminder of the DIY era of the early to mid 20th century, when building your own house from a mail order kit went along with seances, and e-meter self-improvement:

Sears-Homes-1.jpg


488052635.jpg
 
Last edited:
i get that.

and i suspect it's one of those things that actually worked to some extent in the '50s and '60s, and when many of those contacts were fairly fresh, and the number files small -- plus, of course, in a different era when writing letters was much more of a thing. but now it's one of those things that the CoS keeps on doing even though it long ago ceased to work the way it once did, and is now a waste of time (and resources) or even counter-productive. it would be like Sears, which was originally built on mail order, never having stopped printing up and mailing out thick catalogs, and relying on them to produce sales.

plus, as i've noted before, from accounts they do occasionally get some business from letters out. it's probably about as rare as hen's teeth now, and still not effective in any sort of rational analysis, but still some anecdotal feedback to spur them on to keep trying the same thing in hopes of getting the results that they used to.

Yes, in an earlier era when most of the people they were writing to were fresh it might've had some workability. I don't think it can be stressed enough how infrequently they get people in from CF. It really is nothing.
 
it would be like Sears, which was originally built on mail order, never having stopped printing up and mailing out thick catalogs, and relying on them to produce sales.
Yes, Sears was the Amazon of the early 20th Century. Someone far away from a city department store could order just about anything from the Sears catalog .

Sears missed an opportunity (which Amazon seized upon) by not getting their catalog system online, and their business withered as a result.
 
Yes, in an earlier era when most of the people they were writing to were fresh it might've had some workability. I don't think it can be stressed enough how infrequently they get people in from CF. It really is nothing.
yes, it never was anything, I wrote thousands of letters to CF, and other staff did too. Every now and then I'd get a book commission of a few bucks and it was great during the time. However, Hubbard made his money on each book sold times how many staff members wrote letters out and got a book commission, which Hubbard never had to write, mathematics, just multiply number of missions and orgs and letters going out, just a source of income for Hubbard hidden under the rhetoric guise of Books Make Booms. But also hidden is the rhetoric guise of writing letters out to keep a raising stat. You know, each week we had to write more letters out from the previous week. Of course, my personal income from writing more letters out did not actually result in more book commissions for me, what a waste of time and effort for me, but not Hubbard overall.
 
Last edited:
Yes, Sears was the Amazon of the early 20th Century. Someone far away from a city department store could order just about anything from the Sears catalog .

Sears missed an opportunity (which Amazon seized upon) by not getting their catalog system online, and their business withered as a result.
too funny, I couldn't wait as a kid for Sears catalog to come in the mail, I used to look at every page, would usually jump to the kids section of toys, and I would dream I wish could get the new toy for Christmas and my parents got it for me a Christmas present
 
Yes, Sears was the Amazon of the early 20th Century. Someone far away from a city department store could order just about anything from the Sears catalog .

Sears missed an opportunity (which Amazon seized upon) by not getting their catalog system online, and their business withered as a result.
You could actually buy anything from Sears. I was researching houses that people purchased from Sears -- there were hundreds of styles and options. Amazing!
 
yes, it never was anything, I wrote thousands of letters to CF, and other staff did too. Every now and then I'd get a book commission of a few bucks and it was great during the time. However, Hubbard made his money on each book sold times how many staff members wrote letters out and got a book commission, which Hubbard never had to write, mathematics, just multiply number of missions and orgs and letters going out, just a source of income for Hubbard hidden under the rhetoric guise of Books Make Booms. But also hidden is the rhetoric guise of writing letters out to keep a raising stat. You know, each week we had to write more letters out from the previous week. Of course, my personal income from writing more letters out did not actually result in more book commissions for me, what a waste of time and effort for me, but not Hubbard overall.
oh, here's the other thing, In the beginning Hubbard used an outside agency to publish his books, guess what, he figured out how to keep that money by creating his own agency along with all the legal stuff, the agency was called Pubs Org if I recall correctly, which Jefferson Hawkins first started out, but later changed to Bridge Publications, with all the copyright lingo and legal.
 
..

Yes, Sears was the Amazon of the early 20th Century. Someone far away from a city department store could order just about anything from the Sears catalog . Sears missed an opportunity (which Amazon seized upon) by not getting their catalog system online, and their business withered as a result.


That same bullet train barreling down the track at 300 mph was missed by a lot of other monolithic retail companies as well—whose blindspots & hubris left them feeling supreme certitude that nothing could shake their "successful actions". (e.g. Blockbuster vs. Netflix, Britannica vs Google, Gamestop vs multitude of companies offering online sales, et al. )


.
 
But also hidden is the rhetoric guise of writing letters out to keep a raising stat.

The word rhetoric is a noun it is not also an adjective. Using these two words properly will make your rhetorical posts more skilled.

rhetoric noun

rhet·o·ric | \ ˈre-tə-rik \

Definition of rhetoric

1: the art of speaking or writing effectively: such as
a: the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times
b: the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion
2a: skill in the effective use of speech
b: a type or mode of language or speechalso : insincere or grandiloquent language
3: verbal communication : DISCOURSE

rhetorical adjective

rhe·tor·i·cal | \ ri-ˈtȯr-i-kəl , -ˈtär- \
variants: or less commonly rhetoric \ ri-ˈtȯr-ik , -ˈtär- \
Definition of rhetorical

1a: of, relating to, or concerned with rhetoric
b: employed for rhetorical effectespecially : asked merely for effect with no answer expecteda rhetorical question
2a: given to rhetoric : GRANDILOQUENT
b: VERBAL

Examples of rhetorical in a Sentence

  • McKinney made her name in Georgia politics as a rhetorical bomb-thrower. Colleagues in the statehouse dubbed her "Hanoi Cynthia" after a 1991 speech denouncing the Persian Gulf War.— Bill Turque, Newsweek, 29 Nov. 1993
  • Clinton's acceptance speech evidenced some of the classical rhetorical devices such as paronomasia, or punning, and anaphora, or repetition of key words or phrases.— Leo McManus, English Today, October 1993
  • "Take that river down there, for instance. It conforms pretty much to the map, doesn't it?" I assumed he was asking a rhetorical question and kept my mouth shut.— Marshall Harrison, A Lonely Kind of War, 1989
  • … he [Thomas Wolfe] crammed his novels with lavish apostrophes to Life and Death and Loneliness and Sorrow, covering page after page with grandiose rhetorical flourishes … , pseudo-Homeric epithets … , wooden dialogue and pious homilies about "the brevity of our days."— James Atlas, New York Times Book Review, 2 Dec. 1979
  • My question was rhetorical. I wasn't really expecting an answer. you can skip over the rhetorical passages and still get the gist of the essay
 
..
The word rhetoric is a noun it is not also an adjective. Using these two words properly will make your rhetorical posts more skilled.
.

Thanks for pointing that out to Riddick. For years it has always surprised me that he was lecturing everyone else about RHETORIC whilst unable to formulate grammatically correct sentences using the word.

As long as you've opened that door, I think it would be a good time to remind Riddick (again) that he consistently misuses another word, by referring to a discussion THREAD as a TREAD. When others have mentioned this to him in the past he just ignored them.

It's often nearly impossible to tell if Riddick is trolling the board or simply oblivious to the normal conventions of how adults rationally discuss subjects amongst themselves. He seems to revel in repetitious chanting and the annoyance of others.

If he persists in trashing multiple discussion threads (by de-railing them), perhaps he should be given a special award by ESMB. A commemorative replica of the rebelliously recalcitrant GADSDEN FLAG of 1775.

1662907189432.jpeg

But, the motto should be changed to
"DON'T THREAD ON ME"
LOL

..
 
Last edited:
The word rhetoric is a noun it is not also an adjective. Using these two words properly will make your rhetorical posts more skilled.



I'm not trying to make rhetorical posts but to expose Hubbards rhetoric and the simple means of persuasion of his ethos, pathos and ethos. Excuse my proper or improper use of grammar, one will either get it or not. You have to look deeper into what rhetoric actually means
 
..

.


Thanks for pointing that out to Riddick. For years it has always surprised me that he was lecturing everyone else about RHETORIC whilst unable to formulate grammatically correct sentences using the word.

As long as you've opened that door, I think it would be a good time to remind Riddick (again) that he consistently misuses another word, by referring to a discussion THREAD as a TREAD. When others have mentioned this to him in the past he just ignored them.

It's often nearly impossible to tell if Riddick is trolling the board or simply oblivious to the normal conventions of how adults rationally discuss subjects amongst themselves. He seems to revel in repetitious chanting and the annoyance of others.

If he persists in trashing multiple discussion threads (by de-railing them), perhaps he should be given a special award by ESMB. A commemorative replica of the rebelliously recalcitrant GADSDEN FLAG of 1775.

View attachment 18844

But, the motto should be changed to
"DON'T THREAD ON ME"
LOL

..
I am not trolling or trashing anything, I have an opinion that dianetics and scientology are rhetoric in its simplest forms. That's my opinion, whether you agree or not.

I'm not quite sure why you have to disparage or belittle what I write?
 
I am not trolling or trashing anything, I have an opinion that dianetics and scientology are rhetoric in its simplest forms. That's my opinion, whether you agree or not.

I'm not quite sure why you have to disparage or belittle what I write?

Apparently you have not read the large number of "bad reviews" (comments) on your never-ending stream of posts about rhetoric from not only me but a lot of other members of this discussion board.

In fact, you regularly respond to others' posts with sarcastic condescension and nasty insults.

People keep telling you to stop
endlessly repeating the same posts about rhetoric. It's old. It's annoying.

Then you were very courteously provided with your own DEDICATED thread to post all you wanted to about Rhetoric, if you would agree to not spam the entire website with "rhetoric threads" and "rhetoric posts" which had become a toxic nuisance
derailing threads and discussions that had nothing to do with rhetoric. You kept your promise to not wreck other threads for a couple weeks--but then you broke your promise and resumed jumping on other threads with the same old shit. When asked why you were breaking your agreement, your response was "Because I changed my mind, tough shit!"

Only an asshole or a troll would respond like that on a discussion board.

I can give you another dozen reasons why others "belittle" your repeating yourself endlessly and re-posting the same things hundreds of times, months or years after other readers got it the first time you said it.

Another reason you get such awful reactions is that you taunt others and ignore their appeals that you stop derailing discussions.

But, you are looking for someone else to blame--besides yourself. It's funny that only you have this unique problem, isn't it? Must be some kind of conspiracy just targeting you for no reason at all. LOL



.
 
Last edited:
Apparently you have not read the large number of "bad reviews" (comments) on your never-ending stream of posts about rhetoric from not only me but a lot of other members of this discussion board.

In fact, you regularly respond to others posts with sarcastic condescension and nasty insults.

People keep telling you to stop
endlessly repeating the same posts about rhetoric. It's old. It's annoying.

Then you were very courteously provided with your own DEDICATED thread to post all you wanted to about Rhetoric, if you would agree to not spam the entire website with "rhetoric threads" and "rhetoric posts" which had become a toxic nuisance
derailing threads about a wide spectrum of discussions that had nothing to do with rhetoric. You kept your promise to not wreck other threads for a couple weeks but then you broke your promise and jumped on other threads with the same old shit. When asked why you were breaking your agreement, your response was "Because I changed my mind, tough shit!"

Only an asshole or a troll would respond like you do on a discussion board.

I can give you another dozen reasons why others "belittle" your repeating yourself endlessly and re-posting the same things hundreds of times, months or years after other readers got it the first time you said it.

Another reason you get such awful reactions is that you taunt others and ignore their appeals that you stop derailing discussions.

But, you are looking for someone else to blame--besides yoursef. It's funny that only you have this unique problem, isn't it? Must be some kind of conspiracy just targeting you for no reason at all. LOL



.
you make the same posts there are no clears or OT's, which I do also.
 
I'm not trying to make rhetorical posts but to expose Hubbards rhetoric and the simple means of persuasion of his ethos, pathos and ethos. Excuse my proper or improper use of grammar, one will either get it or not. You have to look deeper into what rhetoric actually means
You would make lots of people happier if you used the word "rhetoric" less.

Yes, Hubbard used it to control people, but it was just a piece of the con. There were other pieces.
 
Back
Top