Golden Age of “Tech”

Sometime back I said that I would do an article on the original Golden Age of Tech released on May 9 1996 and has since been superseded by what is called “Phase II” as if the first phase wasn’t enough to completely wipe out technical results in Scientology Organizations.

As with things like the claim that Scientology has gone through greatest period of expansion than at any time in the last sixty years which has been proven to be a blatant lie by actual statistics as opposed the ones that are manipulated then shown with the pyrotechnic exploding graphs presented at various Scientology events as “proof” the Golden Age of Tech’s “success” is based on nothing but hot air.

I myself and others have painstakingly gone over the actual stats and compared them to past statistics prior to the release of the Golden Age of Tech which have shown that it has actually crashed auditor training on a massive scale.

Far from making an “army” of auditors. It hasn’t succeeded in even forming a platoon if one excludes auditors who were forced to “retread” on their original courses in order to “avail” oneself of the dubious “benefits” of the “Golden Age of Tech”.

Also it has created casualties among the ranks Scientology auditors who refuse to embrace the squirrel as in altered technology of the “Golden Age of Tech”.

This can be proven by the researchers over at the website Friends of LRH in the section on What Happened to Training?

Yet despite the total failure of the Golden Age of Tech to deliver what was promised i.e. “an army” of “perfect auditors” they decided to double down and present phase II of this operation.

Much of what I know about “phase II” is mostly rumors so I will stick facts of what I do know about the initial phase of this operation called the “Golden Age of Tech” which began with an “eval” presented in Inspector General Network Bulletin No. 22 by none other than David Miscavige himself.

Reading it one wonders if Miscavige even has a clue about the Data Series never mind having done the actual course known as the Hubbard Data Series Evaluators Course.

Since I can not find the actual IGNB on the internet and can only find it mentioned on Michel Snoeck’s excellent website. I’ll give some of the gory details that I remember from reading it while trying to suppress my laughter in the Qualifications Division at ASHO back when the “Golden Age of Tech” was first released.

First of all Miscavige never actually states what the “situation” is. For anyone who has done the course or at least read the series. A situation is defined as “the furthest departure from the Ideal Scene”. The ideal scene being “a clean statement of its purpose”.

Ironically one could say the so called “eval” itself is riddled with out points like dropped out time, since he never tells us exactly when this “eval” was done though we do know that it was conducted at Flag and that Miscavige who who holds no valid certificate either as an auditor, a trained Course Supervisor or Cramming Officer was critiquing a video or maybe several videos of an auditor or several auditors flying a rudiment on a preclear and supposedly “miscalling” an F/N at above four on the meter tone arm.

As we know. Ever since the release of the HCOBs relating to “F/N and TA Position” back in 1976 that an F/N can occur at any position of the TA due to what is called False TA. Besides how would Miscavige know if the auditor “miscalled” an F/N since he is unqualified to make such an observation?

Anyway aside from not clearly stating what out point he observed actually is he goes on to say how they “corrected” the offending auditor by throwing bags of cement on his or her lap to “demonstrate” what happens to a PC when an auditor “miscalls” an F/N. A novel “training” to say the least and not given in any HCOB ever written by L Ron Hubbard or even in a BTB which would have been written by others.

Then of course there is what Ron says about a process or action even if one doesn’t take it to an F/N:

 

AXIOM 30. THE GENERAL RULE OF AUDITING IS THAT ANYTHING WHICH IS UNWANTED AND YET PERSISTS MUST BE THOROUGHLY VIEWED, AT WHICH TIME IT WILL VANISH.

If only partially viewed, its intensity, at least, will decrease.

 

Not that auditors shouldn’t take processes or actions to F/N but what happens to the PC is not what Miscavige sadistically implies with his sadistic little “demonstration” which he seems to enjoy discussing. Thus his brutal so called “demonstration” presents a “falsehood”.

Yet by then Miscavige has already concluded what the reason behind the auditor’s or auditors’ poor performance is and that is “lack of drilling”. How he comes to this conclusion after watching one or maybe several videos of an auditor or auditors doing the same action which is attempting to get a rudiment to fly on a High TA unless it was his fixed idea to begin with is not clearly stated in his so bulletin which would be heavy on the bull is beyond me.

At the time it was obvious to me that either the auditor didn’t handle the PC’s false TA at the start of session or that the PC is protesting the rudiment which will cause the TA go up (see HCOB C/S Series 1 Auditor’s Rights) and that the auditor and Miscavige likely missed the F/N at the beginning of the session or that the auditor should have assessed a C/S 53 (a repair list used to get the TA into range) instead of attempting to fly a rudiment.

In other words it is more likely the auditor or auditors was or were operating on omitted or false data or may have had a misunderstood word or words something that drilling rudiments would never resolve especially if attempting to fly a rudiment was the reason for the High TA to begin with.

Yet it seems Miscavige doesn’t allow logic as presented in the Data Series to interfere with his probable forgone conclusion about lack of drilling and pretty much uses his bulletin to justify the overt act of creating the unusual solution known as the “Golden Age of Tech”.

But wait there is more. Before wrapping up his overt opus he mentions something about the difficulty some students were having getting reads on Emeter drills. Again there are many reasons for this such as the most common like the students TR 1 sucks or he or she never set the sensitivity setting on the meter correctly or even that the meter wasn’t fully charged or needs charging, etc but instead of probing these possibilities he accepts an unusual solution proposed by a young student who used the suppress and invalidate buttons to get reads yet this action is not part of any emeter drill written up until that point and for the very good reason is that this action could restimulate a student’s case.

Anyway it seems Miscavige is either searching for a justification for the overt he is committing or had previously found one before he wrote his so called “eval” in a recorded lecture entitled A TALK ON A BASIC QUAL  where he claims that Ron “ordered” that they create a “Drills Course” of  some kind when actually he only suggested it and that as the title of the lecture suggests its use be restricted to Qual probably because there had already strict policy of the types of drills that could be used in Tech or the Technical Division as follows:

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 APRIL 1965 Issue II

TECH AND QUAL DIVISION POllCY

DRILLS, ALLOWED

(Dir of Exams must check out this policy letter on the above hats and put on their status checksheet for directors.)

The only allowed practical drills on any Scientology course including PE are:

  1. Modified Comm Course for PEe
  2. Original Comm Course TRs 0-4.
  3. Original Upper Indoc TRs.
  4. E-Meter drills contained in The Book of E-Meter Drills.
  5. Dissemination drills when I write and release them.

NO other practical drills of any kind will be permitted.

Other practical drills are abolished. Reasons: They consume time uselessly, suppress actual processes and mess up data and cases. I did not develop or author- ize these drills and have now seen that they teach alter-is of easy processes. They are not needed. They make poor auditors. I have just reviewed this matter thoroughly and have traced several training failures to these wildcat drills. Further, I traced several failed cases on course to them.

Somewhere along the line somebody went mad inventing “drills” and “TRs. “

If this is permitted to continue, we will no longer turn out good auditors. The standard drills as listed above have proven sufficient for years.

 

Something that would seem clear to any idiot but again Miscavige isn’t just any idiot. He has been placed in the position he is by the full endorsement of the media and the Government as I’ve covered earlier articles and in the most part by an compliant, ignorant or captive management and public. Something I’ll cover in later articles.

Aside from that there are others in management who aligned with Miscavige’s out tech and off policy actions. One for example is Dan Koon former head of RTRC for Ron’s Technical Research and Compilations unit formerly known as RTC or RTCU which mainly dealt with complications and left whatever research was involved to the Old Man as per the Policy Keeping Scientology Working.

Agree or disagree. The statistical and historical fact is that the subject advance further under his personal research than it has under the Squirrel Factory that RTRC became under Koon and the acid head Ray Mithoff the long absent Senior Case Supervisor International who has been mysteriously missing from the scene for over a decade.

But I digress.

We move on to the actual intent of this evaluation by Miscavige which is not an evaluation by the rigors of the Data Series by really is one by basic definition:

 

EVALUATION, 1 . telling the pc what to think about his case. (HCOB 4 Aug 60) 2 . evaluation for a person could be defined as the action of shaking his stable data

without giving him further stable data with which he can agree or in which he can believe. (PAB 93) 3 . the reactive mind’s conception of viewpoint. (COHA, p. 208) 4 . the shifting of viewpoints or the effort to do so. (PAB 8)

 

Probably all would apply especially definition 2:

 

2 . evaluation for a person could be defined as the action of shaking his stable data

without giving him further stable data with which he can agree or in which he can believe. (PAB 93)

 

At which point we come to what some may consider the suppressive intention behind this whole operation and that is to invalidate all auditor training and processing received  by claiming the reason or “why” behind this situation that is never really stated is because “the blind have been leading the blind”.

That is never mind the hundreds of lectures one has listened to or the thousands of pages  of materials one has read or even the personal instruction one might have received from the old man himself. All us auditors must have been blind until some untrained moron with an overinflated opinion of himself or more accurately self importance shone the light of the “Golden Age of Tech” upon us all.

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s