Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: davidb@caen.engin.umich.edu (David Bonnell)
Subject: Re: What's so Scientific here?
Message-ID: <_3f_Jf-@engin.umich.edu>
Date: Sat, 09 Nov 91 17:41:05 EST
Organization: The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
References: <1991Nov6.213823.1249@usl.edu> <z9d_k3+@engin.umich.edu> <1991Nov9.033839.18528@usl.edu>

In article <1991Nov9.033839.18528@usl.edu>, das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A) writes: > Well, I did read the 'you suck' beginning section of Dianetics. It came off > to me as a quack's ramblings. None of this psycho-analytical drivel makes any > sense. Just because some guy says <such and such> about how he thinks people > think, does mean it is truth. Don't be so gullible.

What exactly is the 'you suck' beginning? I think I missed that part. If you are having trouble understanding be sure you are passing by no words that are misunderstood. Look up ALL words you are unsure of. That's why most of the hard to understand words are defined on the bottom of each page. > > Why not respond to this instances which I originally noted in my first > article? They made to bulk of it. They sure don't shine well on the 'science' > in Scientology, if you know what I mean,.... > > -Dan

If you are really interested in the way energy flows work in the body and mind there are books that I can give you reference on. Of course I am not going to just tell you because that violates "the telephone rule".

The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank