From Geoff

I have been seeing some excellent advertisements by the Church and some sections of the Church appear to be making headway. For example, I am noticing prescription painkillers are starting to get a bad rap, also high profile doctors openly stating they don’t like putting kids on drugs for behaviour patterns. So it seems to me CCHR has been a successful activity for the Church. I believe the Church and CCHR deserve credit for being in the forefront of exposing these activities, as just one example of the good works the Church has been involved in.

But I did see one add proclaiming the achievements of the Church and giving stats such as 1.5 million volunteers, 22 million taught the truth about drugs and 126 million enlightened on their human rights. These are impressive stats!

My reason for bringing this up is for my doubt formula, specifically the 2nd step “2.    Examine the statistics of the individual, group, project or organization”. Now I am not in doubt concerning LRH, the Scientology philosophy or Technology, just the way it is being run at the moment by Mr. Miscavige.

I would like to look into these stats for myself and I would assume that somewhere in the world today the Church activities such as those that garnered the above statistics would be happening right now, and this would be a perfect opportunity to do step 2 of the Doubt formula. I am applying the policy HCOPL 16 March 72 “Look don’t Listen”, as LRH says “THE SCENE IS RIGHT BEFORE ONE’S EYES”, this policy is very clear on how to go about investigating a situation, so I am not prepared to just be told this information or read about it, I want to go and see it!

I assume this site is being monitored and I am asking someone to tell me where this expansion is happening. I have also noted that there are other doubters on this blog of Mr Miscavige’s adherence to LRH policy so this information may help handle their considerations also.

I would honestly like to know, please help me on this step of the formula.

21 thoughts on “To OSA

  1. Geoff,
    I appreciate your noble sentiment in this post. However, I do not think that anybody in OSA is going to respond. From experience with them, if you get too…how shall I say this…real, yes, real, as in the R part of the ARC triangle, it seems that they cut the C bit and so fall short of the rest, including the U.

    I’m sure the admin at the Milestone Two blog would let them respond. I doubt those following it in OSA have what it takes to rise above their fixed ideas TO actually say something that expresses something real enough to engender a parley.

    But, hey, Scientology does work so if those in OSA reading this can pull up a bootstrap then, maybe…

  2. Hi Geoff,
    I have some valuable data for your “doubt”. Although I doubt, that your doubt is the correct condition.
    But anyhow. The first step is to find the correct statistic to judge any Scientology activity. And LRH gave us this statistic, which is quoted here:


    The Friends of LRH also collected the data to this statistic.

    Of course it is nice, that “the Church” is doing something about the psychs and their crimes. Actually what is done is done by individual members, which are hindered in these efforts by OSA. Most of the printed material by CCHR (which I like too) does not end up in the hands of publics or even opinion leaders but are not distributed at all per my experience in the 1990ies in Germany.

    But there are visible achievements in the field of psychiatry, but you have to see that there are also a lot of non-scientologists working in that area.

    I do not want to put down the efforts of lots of Scientologists in that field, a lot of efforts by members of CoS. But that is no correct statistic for the CoS as LRH states:

    “Orgs have only 2 major final valuable products.
    One is well-trained auditors. The other is satisfied pcs.”

    LRH ED 131 INT
    Life Repair Block
    8 December 1970
    (OEC Vol. 4, p. 145)

    “The product of an org is well-taught students and thoroughly audited pcs.”

    HCO P/L 17 June 1970RB
    KSW Series 5R, Tech Degrades
    (OEC Vol. 0, p. 14)

    And these stats are going down since the mid 1970ies. RTC did a lot to accomplish that. More about that on my website.

    I hope that helps.

    • Yes Andreas those are the VFPs I am truly looking for ““The product of an org is well-taught students and thoroughly audited pcs.”

      I came across this site by Bob Mongiello http://www.freeheber.com/index.php?title=Bob_Mongiello detailing the stats of the Riverside Mission in the late 70’s. At one point 180 staff and hundreds on course weekly. Basic Div 6 courses had 40 new starts per week. This is just staggering. I have read reports of other Missions and some Orgs also with excellent stats at around the same time.

      According to the policy that I know, these stats would be investigated and the successful actions again put back in! Has this happened, if not, why not!

      Thanks for your feedback and Friends of LRH site, I have looked into it. It is an excellent site!

  3. the word is from in the church that scientologys pretty popular in Taiwan and Russia at the moment, like there orgs are saint hill size and have waiting lists to get on the purif apparently. I believe thisand from what ive heard from taiwanese, they quite like scientology and theres no bad pr about the religion there, so the average taiwanese thinks nothing of scientology, unlike here in the west.

    also from what i have observed over the past few years in the melbourne church, things are slowly improving, i saw gat2 to be an improvement techwise from gat1 but i didn’t see any growth at all in the amount of people on services,

    also IAS regging was very high and i think thats scared most people away, as the orgs have gotten quieter and gat2 improving the tech, staff and public in general are less antago, also i think because staff have given up on the org being huge, people arent trying as hard, which is good because as a public you can go in and not get annoyed, staff were pretty excited about the whole ideal org thing, and theyve had a bit of a loss on not making it big so theyve quieted down which i like, they should jsut focus on serving well and having fun and people will enjoy being there and it wont scar people away,

    stat pushing and IAS regging seeems to have emptied out the orgs in the west, last time i went into the courseroom in april2016 it was really really quiet everywhere in the org, like 2 people in the courseroom.

    • “last time i went into the courseroom in april2016 it was really really quiet everywhere in the org, like 2 people in the courseroom.”

      Hi Pauly, thanks for this information from someone still in the scene, your last sentence said it all.

      Interesting to hear about Taiwan and Russia, but it is the same Tech, or should be. Locality should not make a difference, and there are 2 Ideal Orgs in Australia so based on Mr Miscavidges reasoning and explanation of the Ideal Org, Australia, at least those with Ideal Orgs, should be doing well.

      Good to hear Gat 2 improves on Gat 1, can you go into this more? But to be honest this just sounds like arbitraries to me, and if the stats have not gone up, it was not the problem.

      I agree about the regging and stat pushing, surely those responsible for this would see that it just pushes people out the door.

  4. The problem with this idea of GAT 2 “improving on” GAT 1 is that GAT 2 still uses GAT 1 as a basis and expands which is just piling on arbitrary data and falsehoods.

    Basically, GAT 1 deals with the basic books & lectures (the overt product being the release of the AACs & Congresses at the expense of a few thousand people’s life savings presumably “needed” to release them), whereas GAT 2 dealt more with the Bridge – specifically the (re)training side & auditing and the admin side/org boards and the 40+ year awaited release of Super Power.

    Here’s a great analysis of flaws as a basis of GAT 1 still evident in all books which actually goes in depth on most books (and also notes a lot of books omitted from the basics):


  5. I have a couple of friends who are still on org staff – who I don’t believe would blatantly lie to me – and both of them have said that people are having great wins on GAT II. A few months ago, one of them completed Grade 0, the “new way”, and I observed for myself some nice changes in her comm level and beingness. (This was on a phone call as we live at quite a distance now.) Then she went onto the new Survival Rundown and continued to have good wins, which she emailed me about. The same thing occurred through the rest of her Bridge, up and through Clear, attested to not long ago. (Note: as a CoS staff member she has little time for corresponding either through emails or phone calls, so mostly what I have to go by is her subjective wins. And she might not tell me about anything that would be out-PR.)

    The other friend has been on a tech post for decades and is well up the other side of the Bridge too (OT V). In answer to my question to her about how there could be so many changes in the tech since LRH was around (specifically with regard to GAT II), she explained that the changes were based on a thorough study of all LRH references and that all these references are included with the new courses.

    I got that the changes are mostly based on lectures, and if so that might violate what LRH wrote about HCOB’s being the actual source of tech, but for all I know it could be that the lectures clarify the HCOB’s. And I haven’t forgotten about DM’s “3-swing F/N” or the perverted use of sec checks. Nevertheless, from what she told me it seems that DM is not completely making it up as he goes along.

    All that said, my point is that I would agree with the blog post in that I think it’s wise to recognize that at least some people in the CoS are still having wins, and those of us outside the CoS who are speaking out about it (the CoS) should know what we’re talking about. It not only affects our credibility with CoS members who may be lurking but affects as well our own full comprehension of what has happened to Scientology as a movement.

  6. ‘ some people in the CoS are still having wins, and those of us outside the CoS who are speaking out about it (the CoS) should know what we’re talking about. It not only affects our credibility with CoS members who may be lurking but affects as well our own full comprehension of what has happened to Scientology as a movement.”

    I totally agree with you Marildi but the issue is very clear, what we are not seeing are the stats on the VFPs of the orgs from the Church, all sorts of other stats but not on the VFPs, this in itself is telling, and what scant information on this that does surface is not good. So some are still getting wins, as they should, but for those still in the Church, the elephant in the room, is just not being spotted, that’s the comm cycle I was trying to spark off.

    • Hi 4a,

      You wrote that the stats you are looking for with regard to your Doubt formula relate to “The product of an org is well-taught students and thoroughly audited pcs.” However, although those are the stats of an org, what you were specifically in doubt about, as stated in the blog article, was the way Scientology “is being run at the moment by Mr. Miscavige.”

      So with that in mind, I think you should also consider the many other things that have to do with how it is being run – including, for example, the extreme focus on donations that aren’t even related to services. That and other off-policy management “stats” may or may not have an officially named statistic, but anything can be staticized – depending on what your looking for.

  7. Yes absolutely Marildi I agree, and I have/am doing that. What I have tried to do, is boil it down to the most important thing without which everything else falls apart, and which should be easily seen, which as I see it is the VFPs of an org and the stats which mirror them.

    Every function of an org is in those stats, including functions which should not be there, such as crush selling of one form or another.

    • Okay, I get you. Well, if for whatever reason it turns out that there is no way to determine the actual stats, I’m sure there is an LRH reference for the situation.

      I’m not trained in the data series, but that might be the tech to apply. Of course, there’s also HCO PL regarding “Hang-up at Doubt.” I just looked over it at this link:

      • “Well, if for whatever reason it turns out that there is no way to determine the actual stats, I’m sure there is an LRH reference for the situation.”
        Right: for Staffs and Orgs there is a definite LRH Policy on that: A no report on the stats is treason.

        And regarding the other mentioned stats or situations and out-tech: these will automatically show up in the major stats given by LRH:
        “One is well-trained auditors. The other is satisfied pcs.”

        Because if the Auditors are trained based on out-tech, there will not be any satisfied pcs. Out tech will show in declining stats, as we know that since mid 1970ies. And too high prices show in frustrated Scientologists, which run away and look for alternatives. Same when you refer the PC only to paid HGC-auditing instead of applying co-auditing as the standard route as LRH suggested.

        So: whatever outpoint we are looking at: it ends up in either rising or declining stats of well-trained auditors and satisfied pcs.

        Because well-trained auditors also includes that they are actively auditing: either on staff or as field auditors. And that will result in “satisfied pcs” in the field or in the orgs. And that would result in expansion. – So the “2 publics in an orgs course room” speak volume!

  8. Generally, I’m going to avoid comment on this one, as I have some severe disagreements and don’t wish to antagonize the participants. However, I will note that it’s an interesting conundrum to have to face, when one is doing a Doubt formula and the stats one must use either don’t exist, or are, more likely falsified. It’s not mentioned much in the Doubt formula, but it says something quite definitive about the entity one is doing the Doubt formula on.


  9. Geoff aka 4a,

    If you are applying the Doubt Formula as an individual, in step 3 “the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics” is based on your dynamics.

    So, the main stats to gather in step 2 are the stats important to your dynamics.
    Part of these stats are “negative” stats like false-positive[*1] SP declares, forced disconnection, forced SO recruitments[*2], forced abortions[*3], crush regging, crush sec-checking, black Dianetics, black Scn, etc. Sooner or later, these stats are going to directly or indirectly affect your 1st, 2nd, and 3rd dynamics.

    [*1] False-positive SP means labeling SP somebody who is not a real SP.
    [*2] Do you have kids or family members or friends who have kids? If you introduce them to the Co$, they may be subject to forced SO recruitments.
    [*3] What will happen when your 2D and 3D learn that forced abortions are practiced in parts of the Co$?

    The stats you are describing in the OP are 4th dynamic stats.

    The well-trained auditors and satisfied pcs are main stats for evaluating how well the Co$ is doing, which is an important evaluation on its own. However, when applying the Doubt Formula as an individual, the importance of these stats is based on how they affect your own dynamics.

    By the way, as a 7D “negative” indicator, I have read accounts of big masses of ARC broken entities in Flag and Co$’s AOs.

  10. Hi Geoff,

    I’m noticing that the group here is not quite clear what stats you are trying to obtain and analyze in your doubt formula?

    Is it about the veracity of “stats such as 1.5 million volunteers, 22 million taught the truth about drugs and 126 million enlightened on their human rights”?

    I would ask where the source of the numbers comes from – CCHR? Website views? If they give flak I would say that you’re curious where the numbers come from – one group or several?

    Or is it in relation to the Church VFPs which others have discussed, (such as Clears, OTs & trained auditors, etc)?

    I would check out this site which has a lot of statistics from various sources at least until 2014 as per my investigation:

    (I believe the spike in Clears from 1979 as the definition of Clear was drastically altered in late 1978, but I digress)

    Probably not a bad idea to ask the church for Ability Magazines from 2014-now and wherever else it announces course completions, and then do a manual count of names for Basic line ups course completions, training and auditing completion as well.

    I hope that this is helpful. It may not be 100% complete but even with partial evidence it will at least fill in some gaps for you – curious what you find and hope that you share with us! Good luck in the hunt for truth.

  11. Sorry for the lateness of my reply, I have just come back from a short trip.

    Thanks Mabu!

    Ian said “I’m noticing that the group here is not quite clear what stats you are trying to obtain and analyze in your doubt formula?”

    I apologize for that and I appreciate all the advice. I think Andreas has explained it best in his last reply but it is something I have come to realize in writing this post. From my viewpoint, there is my situation regarding the Church, be it good or bad for me and my immediate dynamics. But I am a firm believer in the greatest good for the greatest number, so if the group was surviving but I was not, for some reason, that would be ok.

    An example of my not surviving would be over regging, redoing the Bridge, that sort of thing. Shit happens and I may have just fallen thru the cracks. But overall, even if I had fallen thru the cracks, if the VFPs of the orgs, AOs and Flag included. I would get fixed up at some point.

    What this does for me, is to take out all the noise, ie, the latest celebrity to leave and write a book, someone has a win in the Church.or the vertical stats of square feet of real estate and distill it to 2 things, well trained auditors and satisfied pcs, and the stats for those products. Simple!

    From what I have seen, heard and read, those stats are way down and they are the stats I want to see honestly given out by the current management and if they know these stats are down despite the Gats and Ideal Orgs, they have the obligation and duty to resign their posts and hand them over to someone who can do the job.

    “Yeah right, that aint going to happen” someone could say 🙂 It is not going to happen if we dont get in comm to find out. I say, dont put up ridges and don’t accept ridges from the other side, we are not in Enemy to LRH tech, keep the commlines open, keep putting the message there. “GET YOUR PRODUCTS OR GET OUT!

    Valkov, I think my gut is telling me the same thing as yours 🙂

    Thanks guys/gals, I enjoyed the comm.

    Geoff aka 4a

What is your view?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s