The truth about life, scales and charts - 218

Life is above and greater than math or a chart. A chart is one
dimensional, life is multi-dimensional, life is infinite, life is
senior.

In my opinion, when someone tries to get you agree that all you
are and the net total of your value as a life form in the universe is what
is represented by a position on a chart, is trying to trap you.

A man is nothing ONLY when he agrees that he is nothing! It's
agreement. A chart is an attempt to get you agree to being a point on
a scale.

A man is not a point on a "Tone Scale" or a point on a "Bridge"
Chart UNLESS he agrees that he is. Someone who is trying to get you
to agree that you are for example "1.1" or "1.5", or "3.0" on some scale
he created, is running a control operation. He's trying to box you up
and package you like you would like some object. Just like a man who
tries to insult you and say that you are a "piece of shit". When are you a
piece of shit? ONLY WHEN YOU ~AGREE~ THAT YOU ARE! It's your agreement
with it that makes it true. If you agree that all you are is "OT 2",
then you are.

Is life infinite or is life finite? Isn't life infinite? Life
itself is senior to charts, scales and math, which are all junior.

Math, charts and scales are all PARTS of life but not it's
master. Just like a pawn is junior to the game of chess. You can lose
all your pawns in a game of chess, and the chess game still goes on. If
you try to explain a players status based only on the pawns, you could
end up evaluating the position totally wrong.

Trying to assess a person's position and value in life by
mathematics, scales and charts is just as incorrect as trying to assess a
chess players position in a chess game based solely on the status of
the pawns. Life can go on without charts, scales and mathematics just
like chess can go on without pawns. Pawns are a PART of the game of
chess, not it's master. Math, scales and charts are a PART of the game
of life and not it's master. Math is one part of life just like pawns
are one part of chess.

Anyone that is trying to get you to agree that you are some point
on a scale or some point on a chart is trying to get you to carve
yourself down so you can be more easily "handled". Isn't it easier to
handle a being who has agreed that he is just a rock than one who
hasn't? Once a man agrees that he is "1.1" on a scale then at that
point he really is "1.1" because he will then act in accordance to his
agreement as to what he is.

Truth Seeker
===========

Here is a list of the titles of all the articles posted earlier
to this newsgroup that the Church of Scientology does not want you to
read. If you're having a hard time finding them, just do a search on
the title of the article within this newsgroup with your newsreader or
go to Google.com, select "groups" and enter the title of the article.

*- The FAQ for Alt.Religion.Scientology

*- The 4 things you should never do on this newsgroup

*- All about the church of scientology's "Xenu" undercover operation

*- Ways of keeping the church of scientology out of your computer and out of your life

*- How the church of scientology tries to justifies their crimes

*- Names the Church of Scientology is posting under on this newsgroup

*- Want to know how to beat the church of scientology at it's own game?

*- The church of scientology: Alt.Religion.Scientology's thought police

*- Want to see an example of Tory ( Magoo ) getting caught in a lie?

*- The Church of Scientology wants to install Spy Ware on your computer!

*- Want to know how the Church of Scientology makes nothing out of their crimes?

*- The Church of Scientology's criminal "Operation Snow White"

*- Did you know that the scientologists on this newsgroup use communication as a weapon?

*- Watch how the scientologists on this newsgroup work the "Effects Scale"

*- The incredible things the church of scientology believes

*- Is spiritual growth a mechanical process?

*- What happened to Lisa McPherson proves one of these 2 things

*- Another Inconsistency in Tory's story

*- Tory's real mission on this newsgroup

*- Want to know how to tell the real critics from the scientologists pretending to be critics?

*- This is how Tory and the church of scientology brought down Bob Minton

*- Why were these important facts omitted from the book "Dianetics"?

*- More betrayal at the Church of Scientology in Washington DC

*- Here are 10 unscrupulous Scientology staff members I've encountered at the church

*- Want to know what techniques the scientologists use on this newsgroup to silence critics?

If any of the articles listed in this index cannot be found, it is probably
because the Church of Scientology has illegally canceled it in order to keep
anybody from reading it. Please wait for me to re-post it in the future.

Thank You.

EoY<c"x=5mQZ0hLo4NLs.LM3Vi>-Z

Yes, there are a lot of schientologist who, being houman tend to see
the tone scale as a competition.

So the ethic is the just the tone scale.

This is wrong, tone scale is part of personal consideration.

It's a base to improve comunication, because you know there are waves,
and we can be cause and effect on other houmor.

I found not a great evidence in the tone scale and even not a great
help
in practical because i tend to evaluate ideas more than just a tone.

Ideas and facts.

But philosophically speacking is a great revolotion for person who say
that sentiment are an unexplored field.

Tone scale is the most important study we have about sentiments.

It's a base to investigate the relationship between an emotional being
and the universe, a base to understand society and our impact.

It's difficult to distingush, pratically apaty from 2.5, because a lot
of people are stressed and tired, so the social tone seem to be 0.

Or if one think different than you, you think oh: it's 2.0 it's a bad
guy.

Some drills on the tone scale need an assistence and an EM check.

Because in prectice people are less evident than smiles on the tone
scale.

>
>Most charts I use are at least two dimensions, and often three. Once in a while
>they are 4 or 5 dimensions. They can also be infinite in one or more
>dimensions.

Are charts life or a part of life?

It's like TS is really ticked off but not allowed to really
communicate, so posting *again* in triplicate is the only sound its
stifled voice can make.

It's kinda creepy. Like hearing faint pounding on a door from someone
locked in.

-maggie, human being

Ronnie Marks wrote:
> Sometime near Tue, 05 Dec 2006 19:07:12 GMT, "Truth Seeker"
> <nospam...@yahoo.com> may have written:

> And, "life is senior" is classic Scientology-speak. You are letting your
> clamness show.

> This sentence does not make much sense in English. (Either British or American)
> Can you translate it from Clam-speak for us?

> False. Even if he agrees, he is still not "nothing". Agreement has nothing to
> do with the persons worth.
> If we agree that the sky is yellow, that does not make it true.
> If we agree that the sky is blue, that is not the reason that it is so.
>
> If we do not agree that you do nothing other than spam this group and post silly
> drivel that seems to be from the pen of an idiot, that does not make it false.
>
> As your entire argument is based on this false assumption, there isn't much
> point is discussing this any further.

> "A is greater than B because B is less than A." You need to make a point, not
> state some silly circular opinion. While you may be writing what you think
> passes for grandiose concepts, it is still just nonsense.
>
>
> Try to post something other than nonsense, like you opinion of the 48 Hours show
> about Perkins, or maybe a review of "A Piece of Blue Sky".
>
> That might be worth reading.
>
> --
> There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don?t know what can be done to fix it. This is it: Only nut cases want to be president.
> - Kurt Vonnegut

Actually, it's his 'schtick'. It's not even about *what* the
comment was; whether a single 'beep' or a 3 page rebuttal of his
supposed 'theories'.

It would be wrong to say that the Truth Seeker 'valence' has any
*single* purpose because it has a couple. Least importantly,
for the simple-minded his patter seems to make sense, or, at
least serves to confuse the issue of 'who is a Scientology
Critic' for newbies. That finish wears off very quickly, but,
it is indeed one of the 'evil porpoises'.

But, most important is his job of spamming spammning spammning
blocks of repeated gibberish in the hopes of driving 'real
discussion' off the front page of 'Google Groups'.

For that, any reply at all is a disruption. His blocks may have
30 or 50 individual posts (all thousand time reposted spam),
but, they are *not* repeats within the block itself, so, he
manages to avoid *immediate* deletion for spamming.

But, if anything disrupts his 'stat' of being *all* posts to the
first page of Google Groups, he gets all frustrated, and,
sometimes he even breaks out of the script and posts actual
shrieking hysterical venom at whoever is sabotaging his efforts.

Maybe he doesn't get 'credit' in his stats if the page shows
anyone else. But, for the 'Church', it's win-win, since there's
always some idiot 'critic' who tries to out-spam the spammer and
answers 'tit-for-tat' to each of his spammed efforts and *also*
pushes actual discussion off the 'front page' of GoogleGroups.

But, he probably doesn't get credit for that :)

I do think it's worthwhile to break up his 'flow' with single
comments at times. 'Tit for tat' is not needed. He gets so mad
he sometimes says interesting things :)

But, to answer 'in kind' is the worst stupidity.

Zinj
--
You Can Lead a Clam to Reason; but You Can't Make Him Think