Because of various problems with Blogger, I've copied everything as of November 26, 2012 over to WordPress. The new location is Ask the Scientologist. I am not deleting this blog and will still accept comments and answer questions here too, but any new articles will appear at the WordPress location. I apologize if this causes any problems.

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Scientology's "Investigations"

I am so glad the Church of Scientology has staged their "independent investigation" of the St. Petersburg Times.

Of course it's a blatant attempt to intimidate the journalists who have been doing such a good job exposing the church's crimes, abuse and fraud, and the St. Petersburg Times is absolutely correct in refusing to have anything to do with it.

And, of course, the Church of Scientology can never release the "investigation", because it, obviously, would have shown that the journalists did a good job.

But I'm still glad the church did it, because it reminded me of many of the other "independent investigations" they did.

While not quite the same, they are still delightful stories.

One of my favorites is the independent investigation of Scientology's "Purification Rundown".  Non-Scientology doctors were paid by the Church of Scientology to thoroughly test the Purification Rundown and determine how effective (and wonderful) it was.  As with the St. Petersburg Times investigation, the church swore everyone involved to absolute secrecy -- only the church could publish the results.

This investigation was going to put all the critics and naysayers in their place!  This investigation was going to be the basis for a gigantic push to get the Purification Rundown accepted everywhere.

You've surely read the comprehensive Purification Rundown report, haven't you?

You haven't?  Oh, that's right, the Church of Scientology suppressed that report.  Do you need to ask why?

Here's the kicker:  What did the church do when the Purification Rundown was proven, in their own tests, to be bogus?  Did they cease selling and delivering the service?  Did they refund all the monies paid for this proven bogus service?

Nope.  The Purification Rundown is still required for every Scientologist.  They are still pushing their Narconon program, which is based on the Purification Rundown, as the replacement for all other drug treatment programs.

Next:  They did the same thing with their "Hubbard Study Technology".  Another independent investigation sponsored by the church and involving non-Scientology teachers and students -- carefully monitored and tested by independent researchers.  Again, everyone was sworn to secrecy -- only the Church of Scientology could release the results.

You've read that report haven't you?  Oh, that's right, that report was suppressed by the church as well.  Color me surprised.

And, of course, the kicker:  They are still pushing the proven bogus "Hubbard Study Technology" as the replacement for all other study methods.

I'm sure there are even more examples of independent investigations, funded by the Church of Scientology, that never made the light of day.  This latest investigation is just more of the same.  It won't be released.

Regular Scientologists don't know this, but the leaders of Scientology know all about these investigations and their results.

The horrible thing is, they don't care that their "solutions" are proven, by their own research, to be useless and worthless.  They still sell them.  And they still work very hard to throw out all other solutions.  This goes well beyond innocent belief and faith.  When they know their own "solutions" do not work and they still sell them, that is intentional fraud.


  1. Well said again, Bill. This fraud point needs to be punched up HARD. What other "religion" makes claims that it has a Standard Tech that works when applied correctly 100% of the time? And when they get challenged on that they say the challengers are religious bigots?? In the immortal words of Hubbard: "What wall?" Or in today's internet vernacular: WTF?? No, they lure in people by acting all scientific and precise and when the light gets shined on their lack of EVIDENCE, they scurry into the darkest corner they can find and start whining about their "religion" being persecuted. You gotta admire Hubbard for the brilliance of his con and how long he has been able to make it persist, even after his death. But the way to break through it is a never-ending refrain being directed at the C of $ of: "Got it on your claims, where is the EVIDENCE? And I am not talking about anecdotal stories like 'I'm feeling more me.' I'm talking about real grown-up scientific studies. Show me EVIDENCE." If this just gets "TR-3ed" (to use a Hubbard term) the dam will start to crack faster than it already is.

  2. Oh yes, they know! There's an interesting part in the time magazine article "Scientology - The Cult of Greed". An executive of a PR company recalled when Scientology contacted them inquiring about how they could change their public image. The solution? Drop all the controversial stuff and act like a real religion. Did they like it? Not one bit.

    It really sickens me that they make outrageous claims like ...independent research proves/ experts agree etc. It's all fraudulent. When somebody asks for those independent studies, they simply switch their position, all of a sudden it's not scientific anymore, now they lament about religious bigotry. As if the success stories were not enough to prove how wonderful and workable the tech is.

  3. I would love some links on these Co$ investigations if you have them - right now there's a number of Australian Senators who would be very interested in them. :)

  4. Here is another investigation done by an independent polling organization hired by the C of S. Remember Lisa McPherson? The C of S very nearly went to trial (civil AND criminal) over her suspicious death while incarcerated in Scn's Fort Harrison Hotel. When it looked like the trial would be held in Pinellas County the C of S petitioned the judge for a change of venue contending they could not get a fair trial in Pinellas due to the prejudicial view most local citizens held against them. As evidence they cited a poll they had commissioned from a nationally recognized polling organization that had interviewed several hundred Pinellas County citizens. Over 90% had a negative impression of the C of S. The results of this particular survey were published and the article is available in the Pt. Pete Times archives.

    Surprisingly, this made very little splash in the Scn community. Here was evidence, derived in a standard way, by a professional, non-biased and independent organization that demonstrated the GENERAL public's concept of Scn; not the views of enemies or critics. The C of S has so fouled it's own nest that over 90% of the population around it have a negative view of the organization.

    This general attitude has now permeated the C of S itself and more and more public and staff within the organization are coming around to the public's point of view.

  5. Thank you for yet an informative and interesting article. I'd really like to see those reports, but I guess I won't until the cult falls.

  6. Yeah, I've heard about these investigations from various sources, but the actual reports are not yet leaked.

  7. It is sad that Scientology can't be honest with itself let alone the world outside Scientology. It does seem that the difficulty lies in the basic structure of the system not the application by the practitioners.

  8. Just Bill sez: "The horrible thing is, they don't care that their "solutions" are proven, by their own research, to be useless and worthless. They still sell them. And they still work very hard to throw out all other solutions. This goes well beyond innocent belief and faith. When they know their own "solutions" do not work and they still sell them, that is intentional fraud."

    I think the reason this is not seen by most still in the church is that it is so unbelievably evil.
    Just think of the extremes that this organization goes to in order to squeeze every cent out of its followers, the lives it ruins in its attempt to maintain a vice-like control over their loyalty and their minds. The truth is that you rarely see this degree of evil in your daily life. Regular, good people don't expect to see it in their community, certainly not their church. I believe it's a case of the truth being so incredible that no one (close to it) can see it.

  9. @Nancy P.

    Hmmm. That is an insightful view. I do believe you are correct. When you are deeply inside the Church of Scientology, you cannot begin to imagine how evil it really is, and how badly you have been betrayed.

  10. Re: Evil of the "Church". Nancy P. put it very well. Who would have believed, as you sat there reading and getting excited about DMSMH for the first time, that it was really written by a drug-taking practitioner of Black Magic who was completely obsessed with money and power and literally wanted to become the next Messiah? It's too incredible to be believed. Back in the 70's when I first got the book I had no way of finding that out. Thank God for the internet. Nowadays a college student who gets "disseminated" to can just google Scientology and cut through the crap in a few minutes. I sure wish there was an internet in my day. It would have save me 30 years of grief.

  11. I think the idea is that the bigger the lie, the more easily it is believed than if it is a little lie. I think Nancy P is right in that it is so insane and unbelievable that the people that are inside it, cant really comprehend it.

  12. I'm going to keep saying this because thinking everyone in Scientology is deluded about its nature is, imo, very dangerous:

    NOT EVERYONE was/is deluded that CoS is about human freedom and betterment. Some understood LRH all too well and saw that it was about power over others and the freedom to abuse people in the guise of "saving" them. That's every bit as hard to give up as the promise of "eternal freedom," whatever the heck that means!

    Personally, I think I saw CoS as Buddhism with cool technology, rather than as what it more closely resembles: the medieval Catholic Church without cool ceremonies!

  13. Oh, I see. They are going to investigate the Saint Petersburg Times. And also KESQ in Palm Springs, California? And the New York Times? And the Australian Broadcasting Company? And, and, and, and, and.....

  14. Just wondering how the recent media blitz, starting with the New York Times article and followed by The Today Show and so many other
    media outlets, impacts the effect that the church
    was hoping their "investigation" would have?

    Seems like the NY Times has called them out...
    kinda like the big brother who confronts the bully and lets him know that picking on the little brother will result in having to deal with the bigger one, too.

    Also kind of makes the church's assertion, that the St.Pete Times story was untrue and the product of biased reporting, hard to sell, when so many other news organizations are reporting the same facts and coming to the same conclusions.

    What a shame. All that parishioner money wasted, all those hopes for a pr "coup" dashed. Well, at least the "investigative journalists" made a buck.

  15. I don't disagree with most of your article, but as an old "LSD tripper" from the 1960s, I must say I was quite pleased by the results I got from doing the Purification Rundown when it first came out around 1980.

    I definitely experienced after effects I couldn't shake off, of LSD especially, as well as other drugs, until I did the PR.

    I had a couple of friends in the same boat who also felt they got a benefit from the PR.

    Have you read the "suppressed report" you refer to?

    Personally, I think it's likely the PR got mixed reviews, but I doubt it was 100% negative as you tend to portray.

  16. You've read a bit more into my post than was actually there. I never said the Purification Rundown was 100% negative. You've assumed something that I didn't say.

    But what I did say is very true. It wouldn't be so bad if the church only promised what it actually, provably does deliver, whatever that is -- but they don't do that. The Church of Scientology continues to claim results from the Purification Rundown that their own investigation failed to prove.

    And that's fraud.

  17. I really like the Study Tech. I am glad it is there. I think the discovery is fantastic. I just wanted to say that. This is some what different than the Church being real about results.
    KSW makes it seem like you did something wrong if you don't get results. And yet the Church's own investigations fail to prove the results. That seems evil to me. It is one thing to rip people off. It is another to instill a kind of "oh, it didn't work, well, then that's your fault" guilt trip.

  18. @Ann

    Thanks. Yes, that is the "perfect" answer that Scientology has for every failure: You didn't apply it right. It is horrible.

    As for Hubbard's Study Tech, I don't think very highly of it. I know a number of people whose ability to read was complete destroyed by Study Tech. If you want more about my opinion, you can check out my post.


Comments will be moderated. Have patience, I get around to it pretty quick. As a rule of thumb, I won't approve spam, off-topic, trolling or abusive stuff. The rest is usually OK. Yes, you can disagree with me.