Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: Nik
1. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
Sounds like Apple fans.
FixedOriginally posted by: Gurck
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: Nik
1. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
Sounds like Apple fans.
iLife:laugh:
?I?d like to start a religion. That?s where the money is.?
- L. Ron Hubbard to Lloyd Eshbach, in 1949; quoted by Eshbach in OVER MY SHOULDER: REFLECTIONS ON A SCIENCE FICTION ERA, Donald M. Grant Publisher. 1983
Originally posted by: Phoenix86
Search nunneries+slave.Originally posted by: TGS
Kidnapping, brainwashing, people dying mysteriously in their "care". I don't think I've heard of mainstream religion doing anything like that since the Inquisition.
Text
It was done by mainstream religion. Who said it was "hidden" did you bother searching? Who do you think funds nunneries?Originally posted by: TGS
Again a hidden branch of people doing things by themselves. The church wasn't condoning those actions. It's like saying priests molesting children is doctrine.Originally posted by: Phoenix86
Search nunneries+slave.Originally posted by: TGS
Kidnapping, brainwashing, people dying mysteriously in their "care". I don't think I've heard of mainstream religion doing anything like that since the Inquisition.
Text
Which is completely unlike, how Scientology forces you to sign away your rights to take legal action against them, for what they do to you.
Originally posted by: notfred
Originally posted by: Britboy
Originally posted by: notfred
It's no more ridiculous that Wicca or Islam or Christianity. Why does everyone make such a big deal out of this particular religion?
Your statement is ridiculous, you obviously have no knowledge of the subject or are just trying to rile people up.
What is so ridiculous about my statement? Scientologists hate phychiatrists? So, Christians hate gays.
Scientologists require you to pay to be a part of thier religion? Many Christian sects require you to tithe.
Scientologists beleive in aliens? Christians beleive in ghosts and evil spirits.
Scientologists sue people who badmouth thier religion? Christians blow each other up with car bombs because they can't find an agreement between Catholics and Protestants.
How is scientology so much worse exactly?
Originally posted by: Phoenix86
It was done by mainstream religion. Who said it was "hidden" did you bother searching? Who do you think funds nunneries?Originally posted by: TGS
Again a hidden branch of people doing things by themselves. The church wasn't condoning those actions. It's like saying priests molesting children is doctrine.Originally posted by: Phoenix86
Search nunneries+slave.Originally posted by: TGS
Kidnapping, brainwashing, people dying mysteriously in their "care". I don't think I've heard of mainstream religion doing anything like that since the Inquisition.
Text
Which is completely unlike, how Scientology forces you to sign away your rights to take legal action against them, for what they do to you.
Your original statement said nothing of it being doctrine, so I was just showing you that "Kidnapping, brainwashing, people dying mysteriously in their "care"." does indeed happen, fairly recently too.
Originally posted by: Turnpike
A cult is any religion that doesn't adhere to the norm faith, these can include Scientology, Satanists, UFO people (ie Raelians), and even Islam, Buddhism, etc. Likewise in the middle east, Christianity is defined as a cult whereas Islam is mainstream.
Originally posted by: Nik
Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem
It's not a religion, it's a cult.
I don't believe there is a difference between those two words.
5 entries found for cult.
cult Audio pronunciation of "cult" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (klt)
n.
5.
1. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
2. The object of such devotion.
Originally posted by: LS20
see... how is that any less credible of a story than Xenu and scientology ? dont forget to leave your tithe at the door
Originally posted by: jonnyGURU
L Ron Hubbard.... Writes a book about how to live a better life....
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Originally posted by: jonnyGURU
L Ron Hubbard.... Writes a book about how to live a better life....
Have you ever actually tried to read Dianetics? It's utterly meaningless; you will read pages and have no idea what he's trying to say.
Originally posted by: Dean
I remember when i was a kid, there was a Dianetics "store" down the road from me. I would walk by it every day on the way to the grocery store. I had no idea what Scientology was at the time and found it strange that they would setup an entire store dedicated to one book!
Critics of Scientology have pointed out that there are many factual and scientific problems with the story of Xenu. There is no scientific evidence that the events Hubbard described ever took place, though in fairness Hubbard never did try to put a scientific gloss on the story. Peter Forde's paper A Scientific scrutiny of OT III analyses the matter in detail.
Hubbard did not elaborate on the number of space planes required to transport a population of some 13.5 trillion people. The Douglas DC-8, said to be an exact copy of Xenu's spaceships, seats a maximum of 250 people and has a payload of only around 40?50,000 kg, depending on the specific model. This means that only about 600 to 700 human-sized frozen bodies could have been transported with each trip. It would therefore have required around 54.1 billion trips with everyone seated or 274 million trips with frozen bodies packed more efficiently.
Assuming the Galactic citizens had bodies about the same mass as humans, 76×178 billion×2 ft³ per alien is 184 cubic miles (766 km³). This is about ten percent of the volume of the Chicxulub Crater, the site of the asteroid impact that is credited with having killed the dinosaurs. The frozen bodies would have had to have been stacked a mile (1.6 km) deep, covering an area more than six miles (10 km) across around 6 volcanos. Even assuming that they were all killed, their fossilised remains would certainly be visible in geological strata today. There is no sign of any such remains.
The energy required to blow up Xenu's victims would also have been colossal. Thousands of hydrogen bombs with a cumulative explosive force equivalent to gigatonnes of TNT would have been needed. This would certainly have left physical traces; Forde lists plausible craters as the Manson crater (35 km, dated at 73.8 million years ago), Eagle Butte (10 km) and Dumas (2 km, both 78?74 MYA).
Such a huge release of energy, more than during a full-scale nuclear war, would have wrecked the Earth's climate, causing a nuclear winter and prompting a mass extinction of terrestrial life. The hydrogen bombs would have left a residue of radioactive isotopes which would have been easily detectable today. It has been suggested that Hubbard meant to explain the extinction of the dinosaurs through the Xenu story but got the dates wrong ? 75 MYA as opposed to 65 MYA, when the Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event occurred ? but this is unproven.
The Xenu mythos includes humanoid Galactic citizens living on Earth at the time; no traces whatsoever of human-style habitation 75 MYA has been noted, nor of mass extinctions.
The volcanoes that Hubbard mentions in the story (notably Las Palmas and Hawaii) did not exist at the time that the events of Incident II are said to have taken place. Forde goes into considerable detail on this point.
Finally, the earlier Incident I is set four quadrillion years ago, which is nearly 300,000 times the currently accepted age of the Universe of 13.7 billion years.