Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
From: pilot@hiddenplace.com (The Pilot)
Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 12 - OCT 1997 PILOT POSTS TO ACT
Date: 10 Oct 1997  14:00:11



POST12.txt 

SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 12 - OCT 1997 PILOT POSTS TO ACT



==========================================

Contents:


 Subj : Super Scio Tech - BPC on ACT, Answering Lightning etc
 Subj : Super Scio Tech : The "From Where" Process
 Subj : Super Scio Tech - Research Note of 1997
 Subj : Super Scio - To Michael (AM) Forgery Warning
 Subj : Super Scio - About Posting Tech (to Ralph Hilton)
 Subj : Super Scio Tech - Homers Enhance/Ruin Process


==========================================

 Subj : Super Scio Tech - BPC on ACT, Answering Lightning etc


BPC on ACT, ANSWERING LIGHTNIN ETC.


On 7 Sep 97, Lightnin53@aol.com wrote in response to my
post "Super Scio Tech - to ACT - Tech Vs BPC" where I had said
"Seems like the signal to noise ratio on clearl -> ACT has
been very high recently." and I suggested that it might be due
to earlier similar charge on the CofS.


> Lightnin here
> 
> hello Pilot I've read a lot of what you've written
> and enjoyed it. What is and what is'nt was brilliant.
> 
> This would seem too be a wrong indication too the 
> clear-l though, and from the outside looking in
> it is often stated in different ways objections too the
> often very rough play on the clear-l.
>    If you use the datum of quanity before quality the noise
> level is a good thing. I always get excited when the posts
> go out the roof, passions flare and shit starts too move
> the only mistake that can be made is not too follow thru
> until quality of comm begins too emerge, it can look like
> a bunch of barking dogs at times, but when the threads 
> are followed thru the Prize of understanding is well worth 
> the investment.
>      Auditing gets you too know yourself and the folks on the 
> clear-l know themselves pretty well, I think they come too the 
> clear-l too know the other fellow, in my opinion that is a worth
> the price in terms of restimulation. 
> 
> Lightnin


Sorry if this was a wrong indication for anybody.  This is the
kind of thing that might be correct for some people but not
for others and I should have put it that way.

I also did not mean to propose that the comm should only be
sweetness and light.  Passions flairing can be lots of fun and
even enlightening.  But it has gone too far when it reaches
the point where the comm line keeps breaking and people are
chronically running off to sulk for months at a time.  And it
seems like that has been happening on a regular and repeated
basis.

Somebody suggested the third party law, but he couldn't find a third
party encouraging the conflict.  I couldn't find one either.

I also can't see the crowd here as being truely antagonistic or
opposed to each other.

So I thought of earlier similar.  Almost everybody here (even me) 
has huge heavily charged incidents of bad situations with the CofS.
And the most interesting exception is Richard Paltek (the former
Lion) who seems least affected by these shit throwing contests.
And he was not in the CofS (his background was EST if I understood
correctly).  Makes one wonder if it was the past contact with
CofS that makes people so easy to froth at the mouth.

I'm glad you like my stuff.  I enjoy your postings too.


Best,

The Pilot

==========================================


 Subj : Super Scio Tech : The "From Where" Process

THE "FROM WHERE" PROCESSES


Alan has been trying to explain the "From Where ..." type processing
commands to Homer.

I though that I should add in a bit of background on this kind
of processing.

In 1951, Ron had the "theory of epicenters" where control centers
for the body shifted due to impacts.

In the 4th ACC (early 1954), he reapplies the concept in terms
of the thetan.  The basic idea is that the thetan has shifted
his operating location due to overts, impacts, valence shifts,
or whatever.

On one of the tapes, he says that you will find thousands of
precise points around the PC where he used to be and has 
abandoned.  This ACC was the "group processing" ACC with
fifty or sixty hours of group processing run by Ron on the
class.  In many of the tapes, he gives a hint of theory and
then runs processes.

As I did the processes commands on this particular tape, my
distinct impression was that I was finding locations relative
to myself rather than to the physical universe.  In other words,
if a point was two feet to my right, it would be two feet to
my right no matter what room or city I was in.  I found very
interesting old pictures and machinery while doing this tape.

Unfortunately, these tapes are not available on cassette, and
might never be put out by the org because that would encourage
people to sit around at home and get 50 or 60 hours of very
advanced OT group processing delivered by Ron himself.  I have
a few reels and have heard others at various orgs.  In this
case I don't have good notes (too busy running the processes)
and its been a long time, so you'll have to put up with my
potentially altered interpretation.

The basic idea was, I believe, to get the person, by just
spotting locations, to eventually spot an actual location
from which he had mocked up or outflowed or was still creating
something.

The "from where could you communicate to a victim" process
was very very late in the tech (about the last of the from
where processes to be developed) and is given without any
real theory.  My take on it would be that before the person
interiorized into being a victim, he mocked up being a victim
from another location (relative to himself as a victim) and 
that location is what you are trying to hit.

To some degree, the contact assist comes from this particular
research line.

Interestingly enough, Carlos Castenadas had an interesting
drill about finding one's operating or assemblage point and
shifting it to the left or something like that.  I forget his 
exact terminology, but it was in the same book as his stuff 
about the Eagle and the sceen where he jumps off of the cliff.

At a minimum, "from where could you communicate to a foot"
(for a foot somatic) is intended to get you exterior to the
foot rather than inside of it.

There may be an implication here that you can not unmock
something if you can't occupy the location where you mocked
it up in the first place.

I hope that I haven't simply added to the confusion here.
I'm not entirely sure that even Ron was certain of what he
was doing with these processes.  But they have a surprising
workability and are definitely not the same as more direct
questions.


Best,

The Pilot


==========================================

 Subj : Super Scio Tech - Research Notes of 1997


THE PILOT'S LOG - RESEARCH NOTES OF 1997


Jan to Sept 1997


These are simply my research notes from the first part of
1997.  Its just a random collection of the things I was
poking my nose into.


=====================

1. NIRVANAH


I finally finished the book (superscio) and settled back with
a sight of relief.  I had been driven and worried least I miss
some key turning point or hidden deadline.  

And I looked around and realized that I was still burried under
the weight of ARCXs and other out grades and that I was, if
anything, more annoyed and impatient than ever about the human-ness
and limitations of everyday life.

I had gained tremendously in horsepower and understanding, and
yet the grades are more basic, the only question being were
they keyed in or keyed out and how deeply was I able to reach
on these things, with the eventual hope of full errasure.

Then I thought again of Buddah and how he turned his back
on the struggle of life.  In at least one of his writings, he
felt that there was some divine purpose to this struggle and saw 
that it was going somewhere, and yet he still chose to turn 
his back on it, saying that he had no need to engage in it
and was willing to let it be whatever it would be.

I thought about how much more I know, in terms of data, than he 
did, not only in terms of modern science and technology, but also 
in terms of what I believe to be the true nature and purpose of the
entire cycle of existance (see "Cosmic History").  I wondered
if he would make the same decision if he knew what I did.
And it seemed to me that he would.  Even great knowlege would
only be a distraction in terms of a decision at that level.

And I looked back down the track at what we had gone through,
and I looked towards the future and what we had yet to do,
and I felt a certainty that things will start getting better
for all of us soon and it will become a great deal of fun and 
that in the long run we will consider the purpose of it all to 
be good dispite all the hardships.

But I realized that I didn't have to be here for that.  In
its very conception, it was already there within the static.
I could simply be gone from it all.  This universe would 
still remain as we had created it, even if none of us remained
within it.  And so I chose to be gone and not to exist on
the future track, and I chose this in a moment of freedom rather
than one of dispair.

A strange thing happened.  A great weight fell from my shoulders.
I did not cease to be, and yet I no longer needed to be.  I did
not have to perpetuate my existance within this cycle, and so
I could be within it without worry or care about remaining
within it.  And so I ceased to struggle.

It was not the abandonment that comes with apathy.  I looked around 
and saw that there were indeed things that I liked better than
others and that I preferred to contribute to their creation.
But that was all.  It was a matter of taste rather than a
matter of need.

Finally I saw what had happened.  I had gotten rid of the
goal to survive and the lower 8 dynamics had faded into
shadows of their former significance.  And with that, a
great mass of bank had blown and I had reached a new 
case state which was freedom from the need to survive.

We are so distorted by the irrational belief that we need
to survive that I can hardly express how differently
everything looks when it is gone.

It certainly feels like nirvanah.  The struggle is gone.
The bank is blown (again).  That mass of charge and
irritation and ARCXs has keyed out.  The band of accessibility
has widened and shifted deeper and the dark regions are
less.  Experience tells me that I'll expand further and
run into the barriers again, but it sure is nice to taste
freedom again.

The next question is how to bring this freedom to others.
It would seem unworkable to run "deciding not to be" because
the PC's continued existance would be an invalidation unless
he made it on the very first command.  So we'll add "willing"
to the command and aim it at the future instead of pushing
for an instantaneous action.

This is an advanced process.  The PC has to be up to the point
where he can decide things just for the hell of it without
making a big deal out of it.

Run these commands alternately:

 a) Decide that you are willing to exist in the future
 b) Decide that you are willing to not exist in the future


                    ----------------


2. SOME ADVANCED PROCESSES


A friend of mine came up with these.  I made some gains when
I tried them, so here they are.

The first one is an action which he found to have an exteriorizing
effect.  It is "Stop Identifying With Your Experience".  This is
quite profound, but is not workable as a process unless you can
do it on the first command.  So we need to work this around a
bit to get a process that someone could do on a gradient.  One
possibility is to run alternately:

a) Mock yourself up with experience
b) Mock yourself up without experience

Other variations are possible, especially mocking yourself up
with various different experiential tracks.

Another process he came up with is very interesting.  It is:

a) Get how the left side of the body holds the right
b) Get how the right side of the body holds the left

This is run alterntely.

He also suggested "Get the flows between the left and right sides
of the body".  This is more of a general target which could be
explored with various processes including the one above.


                    -------------------

 
3. MACHINERY AND EFFORT

Here is an interesting process:

a. Pick an object that is relatively easy to lift.  

b. Pick it up and put it down.

c. Now spot the effort that the body used to move the object.
Spot this a number of times.

d. Now spot the effort of your mental machinery to get the body to 
move the object.  Spot this a number of times.

e. Now spot the effort that you used to trigger your mental
machinery so that it would get the body to move the object.
Spot this a number of times.

Repeat this entire procedure a number of times using the same 
or a different object.

This is an extension of the "run the effort behind the effort"
of 1952.


--------

4. ANOTHER PROCESS FOR HANDLING LOSS


This is especially useful after the death of a sexual partner.
There is a great deal of copying and sympathy between the bodies
and after the loved one dies there is a strong tendency for
the PC to carry the lost partner's somatics on in his own body.

a) Get the effort of your body to hold onto the loved one's
body.  (or get the effort that your body had to hold onto the
loved one's body)

b) Get your effort behind the body's effort.  (this can be
expanded into a number of steps as in machinery and effort
above).

c) Get the effort of the loved one's body to hold onto your
body.

d) Get your effort behind the loved one's effort.

e) Get the effort of the 2 bodies to vibrate or act in sympathy
with each other.

f) Get your effort behind this effort.

Repeate.

--------


5. MY LAST LIFETIME


In my last lifetime, I was a French vaudeville entertainer named
John Claude something or other.  I have trouble with last names in
general and this French lifetime is especially bad because I used
a different last name professionally than the one I was born with.

I do not have a single bit of objective validation for my recall of
this French lifetime and I would be very interested if anyone who
has some knowlege of France in this time period could either validate
or refute any of the things I seem to remember.

I only have vague recollections, much like the average person would
remember kindergarten or first grade.

I did not even become aware of this lifetime until very late in my
auditing at the org.  It showed up on auditied Nots one day when
I felt my attention drawn to a graveyard in France and began blowing
BTs out of it.  I then realized that it was where my body from last
lifetime was burried and I started remembering the lifetime at that
point.  A good deal more has come back to me since then, but its
still no more than a drop in the bucket compared to the full 
experience of an entire lifetime.

One interesting point is that I had found it much easier to remember
earlier lifetimes and the most recent one had remained totally hidden
throughout a great deal of auditing.  Until I found it, my
supposition had been that I had drifted around for a long time
between lives.

Another point is that as a child I had had a true horror of learning
French.  I had actually felt that it was an overt of considerable
magnitude to force little children to learn that language.  I had
4 years of grade school French and flunked every one of them and then got 
yet another first year French course in high school and flunked that too.
And I was supposed to be a genius and I did reasonably well with
5 years of German in the same time period and then I did well with
3 years of Latin after that, but the French was totally
incomprehensible to me and just about gave me nightmares.  After
I remembered that French lifetime, I found that I could easily 
learn French words and even remember some that I had been taught
in school.  Up to that point, I would have sworn that I knew not
one word of French even after studying it for 5 years.

In that lifetime, I was born around 1893.  My father played the piano
in a dance hall.  I remember him going to work in a horse and buggy.
My mother gave piano lessons.  I was studying to be a concert
pianist.  Every year around Christmas time we would go down to Paris
and attend a professional concert.

I was gearing up to try and win a piano competition when WW I broke
out.  I ended up in the the army and started entertaining the troups
in a sort of vaudeville show to stay out of the front lines.  I
would play the piano and tell jokes.

When the war ended I felt that I was too old and my playing was
too sloppy.  But I had enough of a following from the army that
I was able to make a carreer on stage.  I was a sort of third rate
Maurice Chevalie.  My theme song was a hacked up version of the
finale of Saint Saenes' carnival of the animals banged out on the
piano with tremendous force.

Things went reasonably well until 1933 when I and my wife were
being flown to Germany for a performance in a tiny 4 seat propeller
plane.  We crashed into a barn and she died and I broke my leg.
I felt my life was ruined.  I went to America and stayed with
relatives in southern New Jersey while I recuperated.  I pretended to
be a serious pianist an even gave a few concerts.  

Eventually I returned to France and resumed my vaudeville carrier.
Then the German's invaded.  I had a heartbreaking incident at the
start of WW 2.  I had spent the weekend with a girl I was having
an affair with.  We were at a country estate.  She drove off (in
a red car) and ran straight into the advancing German blitzkrieg.
I never saw her again.

Once the Germans took over, I collaberated to save my skin.  I 
would entertain their officers in a night club, being all fawning
and propitiative.  This weighed on my conscience after the war
and I became very sick.

I might have had one or two bit parts in French movies (comedies)
after the war, arranged for me by better actors who took pity on
an old vaudeville has been.

By 1949 I was bedridden and ended up in some sort of a nursing
home or sanatarium.  I began dreaming of being a little child
again.  I started suffereing from what would now be diagnosed
as alzhimers, being senile and entering my second childhood
even though I was only in my late 50s.

I died in 1953.

But the dreams of being a child were real and I had been holding
on to a new child's body during those 4 years.  At a higher more
spiritual level, I think that I had a plan to bypass the between
lives implants by already having an existing body to snap into when
the old one died.  But it didn't work.  I went into the between
lives implants anyway when the old body died.  And then I snapped
into the new body, which was 4 years old.  And that moment when
I "woke up" at age 4 in my current body is the clearest early 
memory in this lifetime that has always been with me even before
Scientology.

As a general note, your immediately previous lifetime is probably
too heavily charged to be found when you first start running
past lives.  But once you have cleaned up some earlier ones
(which will be easier because the death is not as recent), you
can try and dig out your last lifetime by spotting the grave or
what happened to the body.

--------


6. DYNAMICS AND ETHICS

The lower 8 dynamics are not actually optimum from a truely ethical
point of view.  The pattern was laid in by early implants.  It
appears in the penalty universes, but that doesn't seem basic.
It probably stems from the reality wars or the agreements universe. 
The pattern of these dynamics almost works but its just far enough 
off base to get you in trouble in the long run.

As defined, the only real individual who must survive is you on
the first dynamic.  The survival of society is important because
you are part of society, but you can sacrifice a few other
individuals for the sake of society because you only need society
to survive, not every member of it.

Getting closer to home, for the 2nd dynamic, you need to have your
2D partner survive, but you can always switch partners, so that
it is only the abstract that is of paramount importance rather than
the individual 2D partner.

Optimum survival on all dynamics just means optimum survival for
you in a very broad sphere of operation rather than optimum 
survival for all individuals.

If you can get really exterior to all this and look at it without
worrying about your own skin, you will see that THIS IS ABBERATED
and non-optimum.

If you will look at it from the viewpoint of the upper dynamics
that I outlined (ethics, asthetics, construction, etc.), you
will see that you need to nurture individuals with dissenting
opinions to add to the richness and variety of creation etc.

From a really ethical viewpoint, you need to be interested in
the survival of other individuals, not because they are part
of your group or the society that you are in but simply because
they are people too and we need every one of us.

--------


7. AWARENESS


Perception + Knowingness + Memory = Awareness

There may be a break in awareness.

Awareness is never lost, it is only disconnected.

The above 3 probably do not form an interrelated triange like ARC.


--------

8. RELEASE


The PC only runs out a small percentage of his problems.  When
his confront comes up enough, he stops mocking them up and the
grade 1 case falls away.  Then he can forget the rest of them.

But eventually he keys in and starts mocking up the mass
of past problems again.  Then you run some more until he again
moves over to cause.

The basic grade 1 awareness is that he is mocking up his own
problems and he's mocking up both sides.  He creates his own
opposition.  He may not get this the first time that the mass
of problems keys out.

The most basic would probably be spotting when on the early
track he first decided to do that and then run it out.

--------


9. What brought me down from Keyed out OT


In early 1968 we were only running one process per grade.  The
results were unstable.

A friend of mine and his wife had gotten audited through grade
4 and then did their training.  The wife decided that she still
had problems and that therefore the tech didn't work and blew
the org.  Ethics was coming down on them heavily.  I tried to
straighten things out and couldn't.  It seemed to me that she
was right and the results were very temporary and unstable.
This was blamed on PTSness.

My solution was to continue to deliver the tech and postulate
lots of people coming into the org.  But now I wondered if
it was an overt to be pulling people in.  I suppressed my
doubts and postulated even harder to get people in.  Thats
when the abilities turned off.

This was hard to spot.  There were so many other more obvious
reasons.  My own occasional errors.  Errors in the auditing
I received.  Mis-handling by Ethics.  And the possible stirring
up of advanced materials by my fooling around with OT abilities.
And yet all of these were individual things that were in and
of themselves fairly easy to confront.

It was the deeper doubt that really shook me.  I lost my faith
and didn't know what was right.  And I decided to push on blindly
anyway, and deep down I considered that to be an overt.  And thats 
what caved the bank in on me.  Then I got frantic and everything 
went wrong and I ended up sick for months with an impossibly high 
fever.  When I recovered, I was a shadow of my former self.

--------


10. A theoretical basic basic

The first comm barriers are with oneself.


--------

11. A new assist:

alternate:
a) get the idea that you like the pain or disability
b) get the idea that you don't like the pain or disability

also run with "enjoy", "agree with", "want"

Or, decide that you like/dislike ...

Affinity is necessary to unmock something.  You might have
to like it for just one tiny moment.


Another good one:

a) what part of that condition could you be responsible for
b) mockup being responsible for that

It doesn't matter who did it, you need to become the one 
mocking it up so that you can change it.  This on is only a
faint variation on some of Ron's processes.

--------


12. About Ron

Another thing he suffered from was what I will refer to as
the Mad Scientist Valence.  Here one is, let us say, brilliant,
and the world (big generality) wouldn't listen or acknowledge
ones brilliance.  So one begins to dramatize badly, determined
to prove things and gain recognition regardless of the side
effects (such as ruining peoples lives) that might be created.

A further aspect of this might be the idea (an incorrect and
abberated idea) that the achievment of great knowlege might
be in and of itself abberative and mentaly unbalancing.

I believe this to be a false idea which might go as far back
as the reality wars.  Just as you eliminate the holy men by
convincing them that they should sacrifice themselves, you
also eliminate the geniuses by convincing them that excessive
or forbidden knowlege will drive them insane.

I don't think that Ron really fell for this one until he
researched OT 3.  Then comes the idea that if you knew 
something about this thing, it would drive you insane and
you would die.  Then he becomes the mad scientist, sacrificing
his sanity for the sake of knowlege.  But it wasn't the
knowlege of OT 3 that unbalanced him.  It was the beautiful
asthetic of sacrificing oneself that did him in.  It gave
him a way to justify evey one of his remaining abberations.
And successfully justifying an abberation makes it worse.

--------


13. Intention and the Keyed out OT state


Everyone projects intentions continually.  You intend to open
the door, and then you open it.  You intend to say something,
and then you say it, etc.

In the keyed out OT state, occationally an intention carries
forward into reality in a bypass of physical laws.  This is
a one in a thousand occurance.  You might only have one such
successfully projected intention in a week even though you are
continually intending things.

In the human condition, the successful projection is perhaps
only one in a million instead of one in a thousand.  It might
only happen once in a decade or two.  Its easy to discount or
think that you imagined something.

A real OT might be able to do this at will, but the keyed out
OT that we are familiar with cannot.  

And with such a low batting average, you can't even drill it
successfully.  If, for example, you were to repeate the intention
to lift the ashtray over and over for a thousand unique times,
on the assumtion that one in a thousand will get through, you
would build up such certainty that the ashtry can't be moved that
you wouldn't even be able to do it on the ten thousanth try.

Drilling something requires that you at least come close
occasionally and get some posative feedback.

We do know that intention forms part of the equation, because
the OT abilities do not happen without it.  But even when
intention is jacked up to maximum, the manifestation is rare.
So it cannot be the only element involved.

Space also seems to be a factor.  Exteriorization increases the
PC's space dramatically, and power processing seemed to have
the same effect for me at least.

We might also add in willingness and responsibility.  Again,
this is based on what I felt was a contributing factor while
I was in the keyed out OT state.

But with all of these jacked up to maximum (space, intention,
willingness, and responsibility) in the keyed out OT condition,
I still only got a one in a thousand batting average.

Other things, like ARC, that I consider to be important in
other respects, do not seem like they are major factors in
this equation (although they might have some part in it).

I would imagine that there are still 5 to 10 other major
factors that are still out of my view.

My big keyed out OT period occured before I did NOTs, so
that cannot be a major factor in the equation although it
might have a minor effect.  Also, I had no sense of needing
or using physical energy in doing these things, so that also 
cannot be a key element.

There is some possibility that confidence/certainty has some
bearing on this.  The same goes for faith (which may be the
same factor).

"If ye but had the faith of this tiny mustard seed, ye could
move mountains" - Jesus.

Faith in what?  Not faith in yourself or faith in God or
faith in death and taxes.  Its very simple.  Its faith
in the fact that the mountain will move.  Arbitrary and for
no reason, you just believe it absolutely.

Selective disagreement also seems to be a key factor (see
PDC).  Not doing certain things (like agreeing compulsively)
might be just as important as the actions that do have to be
done.

Responsibility, especially in the sense of a willingness to
admit causation and accept blame, also figures in this.  A
process to hit the button of being blamed for creating things
might fit in here.  But simple ethics and morality does not
seem to be a factor.  Its how much blame you are willing to
accept rather than how pure you are.

Note that not-ising being blamed is not workable, its an
actual willingness.  But this button is hot because one
can get punished.

---

Energy is the potential for something to happen.  It is
possible that I only had enough potential for one event
per week.

The upper dynamics are the factors that increase potential.

====

14. MISCELLANEOUS NOTES

1. My earliest goal on the track was "To make them like me".

2. Stats are a vector.  You use them to aim at targets.

====


15. Vengance

To handle vengance, first alternate mockups of being vengeful
and chosing not to be vengeful towards the situations or terminal.

Then alternate mockups of distroying the situations or terminal
alternated with creating it for the sake of having a game or
asthetics or variety or to add to the richness of creation etc.

Do this until you're happy both about creating or distroying
the terminal or situation which you were feeling vengeful towards.


---------------

16. More assists

Mockup another person.  Mockup your making them feel the 
pain or whatever it is alternated with your making them feel
better.  Then have them make you feel it alternated with making
you feel better.  Then mockup 2 people and have one altenately
make the other feel it and feel better.  Then mockup another
person and have them alternately make themselves feel it and
feel better.  Finally, alternately make yourself feel it and
feel better.

Another assist:

Alternately mockup creating the condition for various reasons
and then making yourself better.  Take each reason and flatten
it this way before going on to the next reason.

Reason to use are: 

a) to have a game, 
b) to gain admiration
c) to gain sympathy
d) to add to the richness of creation
e) to force yourself out of the body
f) to learn something
g) to get your ethics in
h) to have variety

Add other reasons that seem appropriate.


--------------

17. Some basic abberations


The very act of communicating requires that we be separate from
each other, which means moving away from absolute truth and
the ultimate static.

The jewel of knowledge convinced us that we must each be special
in some way (inherently special, rather than just doing something
special) or else we would not be individuals.  This means that
things like general or overall or absolute truth do not apply
to us individually because we are different or special and do
not fit the general case.  Furthermore, we must avoid real truth
because it is contrary to the special part of us and might even
be dangerous to it.  This is, of course, false data and abberative.

Actually, each of us is special, but it is the same specialness,
namely the special case of being a creative unit instead of
static nothingness.  But our uniqueness lies in our creations
rather than ourselves.  On that basis, all abberations are
creations rather than actually being part of the person.


--------------------

18. OT Abilites

Currently, these are phenomena, much like the interesting
phenomena that one finds when one begins to apply DMSMH.
But the theories that were spun around the DMSMH phenomena
were not very accurate and practical use of Dianetics took
endless revisions and breakthroughs.  The same is true of
OT abilities, where we currently only have the phenomena
and not the real anatomy or solid techniques.

It is quite possible that the only people who manifested
real violations of physical laws were trained auditors.

I can say for sure that doing the OT levels were not a
prerequisite.  But auditor training, or some aspect of
auditor training was.

Auditor training includes the TRs, not only TR 0 (which is
probably a key factor) but also TR 8 (one of the best OT
drills that we have).  It also includes conciously pushing
aside your case for the sake of the PC you are auditing.
And it includes being responsible for another person's
bank.  Furthermore, the PC may not have abberations in
some areas where you do and so he talks about things that
are not difficult for him to face and you must discard
those areas of your own case to continue auditing the PC.

If TR 0 really goes in, you can't be restimulated by anything
unless you choose to be.  You might still choose to be
abberated in life, but you don't choose to be restimulated
while you are auditing the PC because of your professional
comitment.

There is a funny act of will that you use to unmock an
abberation in these circumstances.  Its hard to describe.

I finally remembered when I blew jeliousy so far out of
my existance that it became almost incomprehensible that
anybody could ever feel that way.  It happened when 
I was auditing somebody else.  I pulled a withold from
him which turned out to be that he had just slept with
a girl that I had been going out with.  In that moment,
jeliousy ceased to exist for me.  It was not that I
suppressed it, because I knew that he would sense that
and because I was sure that suppressing it would eventually
cause it to blow up in my face.  Instead, I put that game
aside at some very basic level.

--------


19. Coins and Exchange


The laws of exchange and economics belong with the survive
segment of the create / survive / distroy cycle as does the
law of conservation of energy.

To interject new energy into the system, to break out of
economic traps, or to have a chance at succeeding spectacularly,
you have to create and outflow without any regard for exchange.

If you are going to operate on the basis of creating something
from nothing, you obviously must disagree with an operating
basis that consists of balancing flows (which is survive or
the continuation of an existing set of flows that stem from
an earlier source).

This does eventually work to your advantage because the
universe by its very nature will bring flows into balance,
but it does this by means of pendulum swings and slow averaging 
which introduces extreme comm lags.

Mozart was probably born rich in his next lifetime.  And even
in the one which ended in poverty, he always lived well and many 
doors were open to him that would otherwise have been closed.

--------

20. First Moment of Existance


Scan through the original separation from static and entry
into the jewel of knowlege.  This has no force or unpleasantness
connected with it, but it is difficult to concieve of.

The only emotion / sensation in this is a shift from a feeling
of passive embrasive pervasion over to a feeling of intense
interest.

The gain from running this is subtle.  One feels lighter and
better oriented.  The trickery of later false jewels and others
pretending to be higher beings falls away.  Also, once you
have found that first moment of incredibly intense interest,
you can use it to pull yourself out of depression and apathy
when needed.  These low scale feelings are due to sucumbing
to the weight of subsequent losses and failures and these 
tend to fall away when you rekindle the original interest.

Spot whatever you can of this to begin with.  I first spotted
having my attention directed to the jewel, and then I found
the earlier and later parts.  Go through it a number of 
times until you feel good about it.

a) Spot being the static
b) Spot the moment of separation
c) Spot having your attention put on the jewel.
d) Spot perceiving the jewel
e) Spot entering the jewel

The descriptions given below are my own Itsa on this.  It
might not be quite right, and even if it is right for me,
it might be slightly different for you.  Also, you might
find more or less on these experiences, and what you find
for yourself is better than agreeing with somebody else's
evaluations.


a) Spot being the static.  There is no thought or feeling
in this.  Just a passive awareness of embracing everything
without really thinking about it.  When you look back at
this, there is the realization that the jewel and the
subsequent universes and an infinity of other things were
always there within you, but you simply embraced them without
contemplating them.  Infinite knowlege but you didn't know
that you knew, infinite awareness but you were not aware that
you were aware, etc.  Mainly because you weren't there as "you".
The static does not have identity, it embraces identities within
itself.  And at this level, before separation, you are the
static rather than being the identity that is "you".

b) Spot the moment of separation.  This is the first moment.
It has the concept of space / separation / distance (a single
concept that has all of these within it).  There isn't
actualy a "decision To Be", that comes from later implants such 
as the penalty universes.  There doesn't seem to be any feeling
of loss or becoming less associated with this.  Although
you are no longer everything, you have the potential of
everything and you have the gain of self awareness and 
the capacity to know that you know rather than being all
embrasivie.  You don't actually think about this (your
attention is outward rather than inward), but the feeling
is good rather than bad.

c) Spot having your attention put on the jewel.  First there
is a general but vague awareness of an infinity of things
and spaces without quite focusing on anything.  Everything
is still, to some degree, within you, and theoretically you
could put your attention on anything.  But something seems
to put your attention on the jewel.  Note that your attention
is not drawn or pulled to it, its more like somebody points
it out to you.  There is an infinity of things and you're
interested in putting your attention on something and
one thing seems as good as another, so you comply with
this subtle directing of attention and take a look.

d) Spot perceiving the jewel.  The impression I get is of
filmy golden translucent facets glistening in what seems
like a colorless (?) space.  The parts are aligned in 
endless different dimensional angles relative to each other
and the whole thing seems facinating.

e) Spot entering the jewel.  There is a feeling of intense
interest.  Not really excitement, but rather a sort of
facination and the feeling that this is what you are here
for.  So your attention (you have no body or anything else)
shifts within it.  You don't really move, you just put
your attention inside.  And the demonstrations begin.

From here on its all the stuff in the "Cosmic History" and
the entirety of our existance.

--------


21. The Suicide Implant


One of the first things I realized when I was getting trained
and begining to hear about implants on the tapes was that
these things would obviously include implanted commands
to kill yourself etc. if you found out about them.  My
reaction was to laugh at whoever designed those things and
decide that I wasn't stupid enough to obey any orders like
that.

So these things should be easy to shrug off (its been a
long time and the implanters are no longer standing over your
shoulder to keep rerunning the implant until you finally
give in and let it stick).  And I wouldn't worry too much
about billion year old death threats.

But the implants do sometimes include this kind of thing
to keep you from remembering the implant.  I don't think
that they actually had much success getting people to
kill themselves.  But they did get people to keep themselves
from remembering by telling them that if they did remember,
they would kill themselves.  Telling somebody to forget
is nowhere near as effective as telling them that they
will die if they remember.

I have found what I think is the most common pattern for
laying in suicide items.  I think that this one is often
tacked on to other implants as a sort of trailer to 
block recall of the implant.  Sometimes they even used it
at the begining and again at the end.  It doesn't follow the
same pattern as the implants it was attached to, so its
easy to miss.  I think that it was used
well prior to incident 2 and has continued to be used
recently and that it was also used at many individual
points througout incident 2 and other similar mass implants.

The pattern consists of a root phrase and an end phrase.
The root phrases are a) "To know about this is to ...",
c) "To talk about this is to ...", c) "To find out about 
this is to ...", d) "To remember this is to ...", and
e) "to think about this is to ...".
There may be more roots.  Each root cycles through the
following endings: 1) disbelieve it, 2) forget it, 3) be insane,
4) be unconcious, 5) be unaware, 6) be sick, 7) die
8) kill myself.

Implant items were never very powerful.  Its the postulates
that you made while being implanted or implanting somebody
else.  Items like this were designed to get you to 
postulate that you'd forget the implant to protect yourself.

I don't think this is very dangerous, but it seemed 
like a good idea to embed the items in the text rather
than printing them in big bold letters where it might
be too easy to pick one out of the middle while casually
skiming through this document.

--------

22. Considering that being more able is dangerous.


We have been third partied to think that others object to
our best traits and highest abilities.  But this is false.

The crowd doesn't kill you because you are better than they are.
They kill you for your remaining faults.  

You can tolerate the scratch on the broken down old jalopy,
but you can't tolerate the scratched Rolls Royce.


--------

23. Traps

The jewel of knowlege traps you with logic.

The reality wars trap you with asthetics.

The agreements universe traps you with Ethics.

 
-----------

24. Rules for happy living

a) have some fun
b) help somebody
c) contribute or create something

----------

25.

There may be encysted intention units just as there are
encysted attention units.


26. 

Achiving a big blow out may trigger some old trap.

There was a terrible feeling of lost havingness when I
keyed out OT.


27. 

GPM clearing: really just a version of Dianetics with lots
of itsa aimed at undoing postulates etc.

But there is an idea of handling shocks and repeater tech on
intentions etc.

I have the idea of an underlying component.  Striking with an
intention or postulate.


28.

When you smash somebody, and don't fully confront it, you have
to create them compulsively so that they don't disappear from
creation.  So you mock them up as a BT and carry them on from
there.  For this class of BTs, the basic cognition is that you're
mocking them up.


---------------------

29.

See Homer's ACT 19 on right and wrong.  Its a nice and inspiring
writeup, but his processes look for things that you are making
right which are actually wrong and visa versa.  The 
processes as given will probably not run early enough.

More basic would be

a) what are you making right
b) what are you making wrong

run alternately.  

At basic, you are assigning the significance of rightness and
wrongness.  This is more basic than service facs.  

Originally, its the simple mistake of absolutes vs gradient
truth.  Something is mostly right and you don't want to lose it
so you make it right to cover the occasional slip up and preserve
it.  Gradually it gets worse and you start making wrong things
right to keep from losing them.  Eventually this gets snarled
up with survival and GPMs etc.

Homer's processes were good enough to take charge off of the
later enturbulated right/wrong stuff.  I fooled with them a
bit and they went to the cognition that making wrong things
right was late on the chain.  That led me to formulating the
above which ran to spectacular cognitions.


------------------------

30. 

Early (pre Home U) problem:

From the time period when individual's unique alterations 
cuased parallel copies of spaces to come into existance.  

Bill mocks up the room with the green chair and sofa.  Joe
comes along and makes the chair blue.  Bill resists and so
both versions sit there in parallel.  This is nice.  It adds
to the richness of creation.  Steve comes along and can go
either way, thereby having more choice and variety.

Now Bill mocks up an entire story universe with great complexity.
He puts in lots of work.  Lets say he makes "Gone with the wind".
Now Joe comes by and copies and slightly alters the whole thing.
Maybe adds a few nude sceens and some more details to the flowers
or something.  Bill has done most of the work, but Joe's version
is more popular because it is slightly enhanced beyond the
original.  Its closer to a native state version because Joe can
cover Bill's blind spots.  And he can do that even if Bill is
"more able" because Joe has copied all of Bill's stuff.

This is still good.  We have a richer product.  But now lets
say that people think that they are in competition.  And there
are rankings and awards or other kinds of one-upmanship.  Or
lets simply say that Bill felt it was his creation and now its
going down a line of alter-is that he doesn't like.

So Bill gets upset or jelious.  He wants to copyright his stuff.
He wants to own it because he mocked it up, and he has trouble
because thetans love to copy.   So he pushes for a more frozen
system where he can own things exclusively.

You see, he could always mockup and own his own copy and keep it
the way he wanted.  Its trying to own other's copies of his
mockups that led to trouble.  Eventually he wins and people
agree that he has an exclusive on his own creations.  But some
people don't like this.  So they start messing up Bills stuff.
Since Bill now owns "Gone with the wind", they're not supposed
to make altered versions.  So they start sneaking in to his
one and only exclusive copy and covertly start adding practical jokes
etc.  And so we get the decay described in "Cosmic History".

Now the mockup was Bill's.  He deserves some exchange and
validation for it.  But the second he tries to own it exclusively,
we are on the road to hell.  So there must be a lie here.  
The lie is in the concept of "exclusively".

Lets draw an analogy.  Lets say that the number line in mathematics
is the underlying substatum of infinite static.  For simplicity,
lets just say that static consists of all numbers from zero to
infinity.  Then lets say that each separation of static is a
subset of this, a series of numbers on the line.  Then it becomes
very simple, either subsets can overlap (including some of the
same numbers) or they maintain hard barriers and ownership
so that every number is owned exclusively.  From this view,
the latter appears to be excessive individuation and undesirable
in the extreme.

Its not that things can't be owned or that everybody owns
everything.  Ownership includes concious permeation and
responsibility among other things and does not come as a passive
freebie.  But exclusive ownership is an abberation and may be
the underlying reason behind our entrappment into MEST.

In the current reality, we have sunk so low on this that when
one of use uses something (such as eating a piece of cake),
it becomes used up for all (the cake can only be eaten once).
We are in such an inversion of an inversion that we can't even
approximate sane behavior in this area.

But in the area of ideas, we still have things which can
replicate endlessly without loss to the original owner.  But we
are fighting hard to make those exclusive too.  If this goes
on, you wouldn't be able to think a thought without copyright
permission from the first person who thought that particular
thought (or who got to the copyright office first on an old
idea).  We'd better turn this one around.  You must validate
the originators of new ideas.  But you must not let anything
be nailed down as an exclusive or we'll slide down into the
next layer of the trap.

  
-------------------

31.

processes:

mockup a way to waste ability.
mockup a way to waste conciousness.

selectively abandon and restore abilities.
selectively abandon and restore areas of conciousness.

--------------

32. 

The absolutes are deadly.
Disconnection is a killer to the person who disconnects.

You can increase and decrease bandwidth.  Favor the terminals
that are desirable and reduce comm to the undesirable ones,
but never cut the line completely or it backs up on you.

--------------

33. Expanded Power

The unsatbility of the 5/5A ep and keyed out OT state and the
failure to reattain it on rehab may simply be due to its
being a quickie level.

Maybe we need a dozen or more processes for each step of grade 5
(source, not-is, conditions (continuous self-restim, floating
PT sources) ).

A process for cronic conditions (fill in the blanks):

a) spot a source for (condition)
b) spot a no-source for (condition).

---------------

34. Fun

The button of "having fun" needs to be run.

People accidentally kill themselves and others as part of
having fun and also will kill others to stop them from having fun.

---------------

35. Intentions

People incorrectly dub-in the intentions of others.  This is
chronic.

The person is going to make real decisions based on imaginary
data.

==========

36.

Looking over Homer's archives.

The senior/junior abberations

> See exm36 - Electra analyzing parent/child relationships and
> developing parent/child overts processing etc.
> 
> The problem is that as a child, one is on the other side of
> overts that one committed as a parent in earlier lives.
> 
> Reverse Roles O/W: (use the 4 questions in rotation)
> 
> a) as a parent, what have you done to a child
> b) as a child, what have you done to a parent
> 
> c) as a parent, what have you withheld from a child
> d) as a child, what have you withheld from a parent
> 
 
Electra gets much more complex.  I'm hoping that the other buttons
(such as make wrong etc.) aren't needed.

This can be adapted to any freequently repeated cycle where one begins 
as a effect viewpoint and proceeds upwards to a cause viewpoint that
can dramatize at the effect viewpoint.  This has the apparancy of
a mechanical upward spiral (growing older and wiser etc.) while
really building layers of cumulative abberation.

 
Other good pairs to run in this are:

1. boss/worker (or senior/junior)
2. teacher/student
3. leader/follower
4. spirit/body ("when being a body, what have you done to a spirit").
5. god/worshippers


====================

37. Various kinds of breaks (speculative)


Be, Do, Have = Games. (BDHG)

Breaks run like ARCU.

The black emotions (hate, vengance, jeliousy)
stem from distroyed be, do, have, or games.

KRC = creation = 16th dyn

ARC = U = 15th dyn
 (cdeinr)

BDH = G = 14th dyn
 (denied, distroyed)

comm, change, motion = life force = 13th dyn

thought, data, logic = reason = 12 dyn
 (evaluated, invalidated, hidden, falsified)



emotion, rythm, harmony = asthetics = 10 dyn
 (mood, rythm, harmony per electra)
 (inval, hidden, false)

====================


38. Theory of Multi-Threaded Higher Selves

This one is a bit frightening.  It is highly speculative.
Don't bet the farm on this one, its probably half wrong.

My friend suggested to me that just as a one-lifetime human
existance was too limited a theory to resolve most conditions,
so too was the idea of a thetan.  It would only be a second
level and there would be a third (and possibly more) above
it.  In other words, the concept was too limited.

He also pointed out that simply because we need to run past
life incidents and could do so with benifit does not mean that 
we were those people or that a singular sequential track is a 
correct concept.

I responded by thinking of multi-threaded server processes in
large computer systems.

There will be a number of programs.  Each program in turn can
have many threads running in parallel.  Each program can
generate and discard threads at will, either identical ones
or varying ones as needed.  Each program might have hundreds
of threads.  The threads have unique working memory, but also
have access to the memory which is global to the program as
a whole and are also capable of accessing each other if
desired, passing things between threads, because it is all
really within the same program.  Each thread runs sequentially,
but the program as a whole includes all of its threads and
therefore operates in parallel.

I design systems like this, so I'm quite familiar with what
can be done.  You might, for example, have a program that
is running a bank of modems.  You would have one thread per
modem and also special threads for scheduling and timeing
and various other things, all running as a single program
for the sake of efficiency (you can run hundreds of modems
or terminals from a single PC this way under OS2 or NT if
you code efficiently).

Now consider that there are 10,000 super-beings, each like
one of the programs above.  Each can generate multiple threads
within it, with each thread being a "thetan" with a sequential
track.  Each super-being might have about half a million people 
here on earth at this time.  Or maybe there are a number
of layers and at this level one only encompasses thousands
of people instead of millions.

The threads could be of long or short duration.  Ideally they
would pass through many lives but since we don't retain good
continuity here on Earth, the likelyhood is that the threads
here hit the between lives area and get chewed up by the machinery.

But the memory is global.  So that any current thread can
remember being any past thread generated by the same program
(the difference between a thread and a program is that 
programs do not share memory with each other except under
special circumstances).

In other words, each person could theoretically remember 
(accurately) having been a few hundred thousand different
people last lifetime.

But all indications are that this higher-self or oversoul is
itself unconcious and in bad shape.  In other words, the
program itself is crashing, but continues to stumble on in
some fashion, launching threads in an attempt at error recovery.

Again drawing a computer parallel, one often codes threads
to intercept errors and attempt recovery within a failing
program.

That would put any seekers of truth in the position of being
error recovery threads attempting to solve whats wrong.

And note that it is the full CPU which shifts into each
thread momentarily while it is active.  So the big theta and
the individual threads or identities are the same theta, it
is only the context and viewpoint which varries.

For further research, one thing to try would be to run
incidents from multiple viewpoints simultaneously.  To
drill mockups of being both the oppressor and victim 
at once.  And to practice parallel threaded thought.

And then to run incidents as the higher self, addressing
basics and redefining them as needed into the context
of a multi-threaded being.  In that circumstance, life
or death of a thread or the success or failure of an
identity is trivial.  Interest and excitement would
be more important.  The things people like to watch on
TV might be a good parallel for what this higher self
currently enjoys doing with its threads.

Note that early theory labeled tones 0 to 4 as the
thetan plus body range and then theorized -40 to +40
as the broader range of a thetan.  And then recognized
that almost all thetans were way below 0 without a body
(that's why they can't see or operate, they need a body
to drag them up above death).  Extending this, the higher
self might have an operating range of -4000 to +4000 and
currently be somewhere down below about -2000 except for
a few of its active threads which have bodies.

As I said, this is highly speculative.  Perhaps just an
impossible idea to practice believing before breakfast
just for the sake of exercising ones imagination.



====================


39. SAME GOAL CONFLICTS (SGCs):

Bill wants to be god and make Joe worship.
Joe wants to be god and make Bill worship.

Not two different goals in opposition but two different people
each with the same goal who are each trying to be the one.

Fights over who owns the space.

Reality wars.  Not opposing goals of a 3D being vs a 4D being.
Its a same goal conflict: Who gets to mockup the space and
who gets overwelmed.

Cats and Dogs.  Mockups (objects) in opposition on same goal
fights.  Both creators want to own the pet market, and mockup
different things and push the things against each other.

Modern sports are same goal conflicts.

Have for self and can't have for others.

Both want to Know and force the other guy to not-know.

Both want to be the one who talks and force the other to listen.

Both want cause point and to force the other into effect point.

At a minimum, this abberates on the attempt to maintain a
one way flow.  So even a super god goes solid and decays eventually
because he keeps outflowing (mocking up) as God and refuses to
inflow or accept others creations.

Only mutual co-existance, balanced cause/effect is stable.
If you only drive down a one way street, eventually you will
drive into the ocean and sink.

This goes much much earlier than GPMs.  It predates true valences
(which are fixed patterns).  It is direct conflict of mockups
by beings of comparable and near infinite capabilities who are
not limited by roles or constrained by the valences they mockup.

Its who's anchorpoints predominate.  Who owns the space.

Since at basic, all encompasing theta is all space, and all
separation is a lie (the first lie, never to be undone because
it looses the somethingness), there is no unique ownership of
space except by consideration.

The basic consideration is that owning the anchorpoints equals
owning the space.  But simple postulated massless anchorpoints
are also non-unique and too easy for anyone to assume ownership
(because they are identical from being to being).

So the attempt is to mockup unique objects with the consideration
that this makes them yours instead of somebody elses and therefore
enables you to own the space.  But what you can view you can
have, so the effort is to also make them non-confrontable
by others.

One being mocks up dirty diapers and another being non-confronts
them.  Guess who owns the space.  Now we see the high theta
reason that godlike beings mock up so much filth and degredation.

Now we see why Ford and GM have trade secrets and patents.
Their anchor points cannot be duplicated by the opposition and
taken over.

These same goal conflicts and battles of mockups continue to
this day.  Abberations are addative, the simple more basic
ones carry forward along with the more complex ones that evolved
later.

There is a basic flow imbalance.  One wants maximum inflow (total
effect) of perceptions and knowingness (so one can take over other's
mockups) while inhibiting others inflow (so they can't duplicate,
predict, and control your mockups).  And at the save time one
wants maximum outflow (total cause) of all operating energies and 
doingness while inhibiting others outflow.  Furthermore, one
wants to outflow mockups (objects) at maximum but must at the
same time inhibit others from inflowing them to the degree where
they perfectly duplicate them and either as-is them or take them
over.

This is guaranteed to be self entrapping.

What discreditable mockups are you carrying around to force
others to back off and leave you alone.


====================



==========================================



 Subj : Super Scio - To Michael (AM) Forgery Warning


TO MICHAEL (AM TECH) FORGERY WARNING


On 14 Sep 97, "B.Crayne" <spook3s@seaknet.alaska.edu> posted
on subject "What Pilot found - AM Tech"

>> From: R. A. Van Haarlem <rvh@tig.com.au>
>> To: 'Clear-L' <clear-l@lightlink.com>; 'spook3s@seaknet.alaska.edu'
>> Subject: What Pilot found - AM Tech
>> Date: Sunday, September 14, 1997 1:47 AM
>> 
>> RVH:
>> Forgive me if you have seen this, but I think, going by the lack of
>> enthusiasm and respect shown for MM's tech, that very few on
>> this list would have sought this out. I *DO* think it is worth posting.
>> 
>> This is from one of Pilots home pages, and obviously ex    a.c.t.
>> 
>> What I noticed:
>> 
>> 1. This does *NOT* seem to be a shallow, insignificant tech as
>> some claim.
>> 
>> 2. Seems like a lot of charge in this area, well worth perservering with.
>> 
>> 3. Michael deserves *GREAT* credit for finding these guys given they
>> *ONLY* answer to Animal minds.
>> 
>> 4. Seems to me the counting method *IS* slow. MM has done over
>> 8000 hrs!  Maybe a faster way could be found. Pilots ideas are 
>> interesting but I couldn't achieve much with "spot being made into 
>> an AM". I wasn't able to "permeate the cloud" so this is probably 
>> why. Doesn't seem like he tried counting.
>> 
>> 5. Pilots "dating" of "about the reality wars", fits in with what MM
>> said in "the last secret". ie Beings changing each others creations
>> around.
>> 
>> Anyway, what follows is exactly as found on Pilots web page:
> 
> 
> Thanks R.A.,
> 
> I'd read the "pilots" take on the AM material at the suggestion of one of
> the Clear-l folks.  Have been in correspondence with, Pilot, and have sent
> my complete manual so he can post it to some news groups he likes.
> 
> I have found the, Pilot , to be a fair observer; not into the nastyness so
> polpular one Clear-l.  
> 
> I sent him some tips on how to better off-load the AM material.  I havent
> heard how it has worked for  him.
> 
> I'll be posting some tips on off-loading on Clear-l under seperate cover.
> 
> Thanks for your comm and good wishes.
> 
> With love,
> 
> Michael


WARNING - DANGER - POSSIBLE FORGERY

As of this writing, I have never sent any emails or any other correspondence 
to anybody as 'The Pilot'.

I may do this eventually (I owe Homer an email as soon as I finish
reading the RFCs and practicing with looped back mail servers), but
when I do, I will always PGP sign the first message using my PGP
key which is available at a number of websites and can be found on
a number of posts which are archived in DejaNews.

Up until now, I have ONLY posted to newsgroups.

If somebody else has contacted you pretending to be "The Pilot",
it is a forgery.  If anybody else has received emails from "The
Pilot", please be warned and post a message to the newsgroup.

There is currently No Way that any message can reach me except
by posting it to ARS or ACT because the return address on my
posts is bogus.  If it becomes essential to send me a secret
message, it can be encrypted under my public PGP key (but I don't
want to encourage this, it might make people nervous) and 
posted to a newsgroup.

I am hoping that this is a simple misunderstanding.  If you
emailed stuff to the person who is hosting the Pilot's homepage
or one of the other pilot websites, and they replied, then you
might have mistaken them for me.  They are not me, and I have
absolutely no contact with them except through messages on the
newsgroup and they do not know who I am.  But I'm quite happy
if you want to correspond with them and send them materials or
whatever because they are doing a wonderful job as hosts with
no direct support from me.

And just when Homer and others had cooled down my worries
about OSA too!  Well, I'll be happy if you simply indicate that
it was a misunderstanding.  But if it wasn't and you really
recieved a fake email from somebody claiming to be "The Pilot",
then please post the email headers etc.

If there is any doubt as to who's who, simply ask them to
email you with a PGP signature around the message (as I am
doing with this news post) and use the key that is out
on the webpages (get at least two and compare them) to verify
it.

In case you don't know how PGP works, there are two parts to
the key, a secret part and a public part.  You can use the
public part to encode messages to me or verify signatures
from me (that is the part that is published on the webpage 
for everybody to pick up) but you need the secret part (which 
only I have) to decode encrypted messages or place a signature 
on something.

----------

As far as your tech goes, I think that you need to:

a) find ways to increase the amount of ITSA (NOTS suffers 
from this problem too)

b) don't discount other case factors or invalidate the other
research lines.  Every major area I hit gave me the impression
that all other phenomena derrived from it, that is just a side
effect of having found something major.

For example, let us say that the being is suffering from case
factor "A".  Eventually this leads to his begining to create
a new case factor, call it "B".  After this, subsequent occurances
of "A" will lock up on "B".  And of course occurances of "B"
lock up on "A" because it derrived from "A".  So you can't tell
which is really more basic until you blow all the charge on
one or the other.  And in the meantime, you can mistakenly
think that everything derrives from "B" because all of "A"
that is visible does seem to trace back to it.

On any major case factor, it always looks like you have the
one and only source while you are handling it.

c) If you can, try and get above the AM band instead of scraping
away at it from the underside.  You've run this more than
anybody so you should be closer to the top.  There has to be
a higher super-self that fragmented and generated these AMs.
Find out why.  Get Itsa.  Try ruds and other basic buttons 
on the events leading up to generating AMs.  Try tricks like
mocking up a way to wast AMs or a way to have more AMs.

It might take a researcher thousands of hours to get off enough
charge to find an undercut on some new case factor.  But that's
his job.  Once he's gotten through the barrier, he can spot
the easy tricks that are visible from the other side and give
everybody else a shortcut.


Good Hunting,

The Pilot

==========================================


 Subj : Super Scio - About Posting Tech (to Ralph Hilton)


ABOUT POSTING TECH (TO RALPH)


On 26 Sep 1997, Lightnin53@aol.com wrote
on Subject = Re = OT12?
Message-ID = <970926050526_2020509459@emout02.mail.aol.com>

>In a message dated 97-09-26 02:54:53 EDT, Address@bottom.of.mail writes:

Was this a post from Ralph Hilton?  I'll assume so.

>>I haven't posted a lot of tech - maybe 4 or 5 issues. I haven't had
>>a single response from anyone who said they actually got on the cans
>>and tried any of it. So it sometimes seems to be a bit pointless.
>>The sort of things I'm working on seem to need a personal groove-in.
>

I may have missed some of your technical posts.  And every process doesn't
indicate to everybody.  But that one on Helatrobus was quite valuable.
I do try some of the things that I see on the net, and I often
just cognite while reading the process.  And some things I save
for later or discount because I've hit them already from a different
angle, but that doesn't reduce their value to others.

You have to allow for the fact that the ratio of readers to posters
is probably about 100 to 1.

We may be nurturing future tech finders and not even know it.


>Maybe posting tech processes are'nt the real needed and wanted
>on the clear-l, in fact I got a lot more out of just hearing talk about
>your takes on some of the fundamentals from a great deal of
>experience, it put you iin a different light for me.
>   And you came across as a sincere and dedicated researcher
>with great passion and honor for your craft.
>   I'm hardly a master but I have enough on the ball too recognize
>it when I see it.
>   So keep up the good post I'm enjoying them and gaining some
>insights and I appreciate it.
>
>Lightnin

I think we need both.  Aside from that, I'm in agreement with
Lightnin.

But as far as Ralph's remarks go, I disagree.  Maybe he just
needs some encouragement.

I think that many different things are needed.  One of them is a
research forum where devising new processes and new theories is
a major item.  

One of the things that disappointed me when I first started lurking
on ACT and ARS (well before I started posting) was that there
was very little tech proportionately.  Luckily I found Homer's
archives and some other things on the net.

Now there is much more tech online, and not just mine either.  
And I'd like to fan the flames.  Its not at all pointless.
  
Among other things, we need to build up a body of liturature that
overshadows Ron's.  Until we match the entirity of his contribution
to the field (and I mean really match it, not invalidate what he did)
we will have a subject that has a single primary source.  And that
is bad because every individual source (including me) will have
blind spots and pet peeves and individual quirks.

Some people try to get out from under Ron's big thumb by saying
that their one and only process is The Answer.  We know where to
shove that idea.

Its only by actually having a comparable quantity of additional
answers that we will truely break free of the old limits and
a singular influence that unfortunately had bad points as well
as good ones (nobody's perfect).

I can't match LRH for sheer volume.  Neither can Alan or anyone
else that I've seen.  But if each of us keeps making our own 
breakthoughs and pooling our knowledge and writing like a mad 
motherfucker, we are going to leave Hubbard in the dust.

Another reason for continuing to issue technical posts is that
the tech really is terribly incomplete.  We need every ounce
of insight and understanding that we can muster.

I believe that the goal of true OT or a real clear (beyond DMSMH 
- full whole track recall and freedom from abberation) or (if you 
will) all of us reawakening as gods is possible.  We just don't
know enough to get there yet, so we settle for half measures.

I had my huge keyed out OT state on just a small amount of
auditing.  It lasted for months and I often violated physical
universe laws.  My feeling then and to this day is that if
somebody had known the right process commands to give me in
that state, I could have made it all the way.  Something like
"find your theta zorch, rotate it 90 degrees, and step out"
(I'm only half joking).

I know things now that would have been immensly useful to
me then.  Things that took me hundreds of hours of solo to
reach that I could have spotted instantly at that time if my
attention had been directed correctly.

If we had it right, all those false promises would be true.

But it will take lots of research and lots of researchers.

Yet another point is that when tech is posted, it reaches
beyond the current audience.  Things get archived.  They are
available to future seekers of truth.  When you post valid
tech, you are also writing for posterity.  These are seeds
and who knows what wonders might grow from them.

Ralph is one of the more experienced and level headed technical
posters.  Let's have more of his stuff rather than less.  A Ralph 
Hilton Technical Webpage would be a really good thing.

I might not always agree with him.  So what.  You do not saturate
a target by aiming all of your guns exactly the same.  Instead
you catch the target in a cross fire.


Yours in truth,


The Pilot


PS, I'm cross posting this one to alt.spiritual.enhancement
in support of Hilderun Beer, but I haven't seen been able
to find that newsgroup anywhere yet.  If it becomes viable,
I'll include it along with ARS and ACT in my posts.


==========================================


 Subj : Super Scio Tech - Homers Enhance/Ruin Process


HOMER'S ENHANCE/RUIN PROCESS


On 10/4/97 1:57 PM homer@lightlink.com wrote
on subject "Enhance and Ruin"


>    ENHANCE AND RUIN
> 
>    To Enhance
>    To Ruin
> 
>    To Enhance the Future
>    To Ruin the Future
> 
>    From where could you experience an enhanced future?
>    From where could you experience a ruined future?
> 
>    From where could you enhance a future?
>    From where could you ruin a future?
> 
>    How could ________ enhance a future?
>    How could ________ ruin a future?
 

It looked interesting, so I tried out a few commands when
I read this.

Dropped me right into an implant.

Something like:

TO ENHANCE IS TO SUFFER FUTURE RUIN.


Almost certainly a penalty universe item (see Super Scio).

You could probably get away with running -

a) what could you enhance
b) what could you ruin

That's PT and not so likely to toss you back into old shit.
And it let's you do objective spotting to keep havingness
up while running it.

----

Advice for Homer -


It does seem like you're doing things to stir up charge.
Possibly pulling in charge in the hope of getting answers
as to why you are in the condition that you're in.  

Unfortunately, that doesn't work well.  You need to reduce
the charge, and then spot answers with a clear head.

I have recently had fantastic success with a process for
knocking out what one is attracting compulsively and
trying to get away from.

It is the reverse flow of the "Mock up a way to waste ____"
which is run on things that one must have but can't get.

This handles the "must avoid but can't get away from" side
of things.

The command is -

MOCKUP A WAY TO HAVE MORE ____


For you I would suggest -

MOCKUP A WAY TO HAVE MORE CHARGE


Note that this is not a reverse process.  The ridge is already
reversed and you are blowing out what you are doing compulsively
by doing it conciously.

I ran "Mockup a way to have more pain" recently as an assist
on a friend who is in bad physical shape.  It went on for an
hour of kicking and screaming and then went to the most 
fantastic spectacular cognitions.  He saw how he had been
creating more pain for himself.

I ran this on myself on an item that was really giving me
trouble (something I was trying to avoid), again with magical 
results.


Good Luck,

The Pilot


==========================================


See the "SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" by the Pilot 
at http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/pilot.html
or http://www.igs.net/~michaelv/scnreform.htm
or The Pilots Home Page at http://super.zippo.com/~freezone/pilot/index.htm

Get the Pilot materials (the 32 part SUPER SCIO book) at:
ftp://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/pub/ss/index.html
or pick up the ss## files from Homer's archive at lightlink.com.

All of this weeks posts will be collected in 
Super Scio Archive #11, 12, and 13 and posted to ACT.

------------------



