Possibly Helpful Advice

Finding your way after leaving the cult of Scientology

Self-Destruction at Its Best

Another exposé of the true state of Hubbard Technology by Kathy Elliott. Her experiences parallel mine and that of many others who attempted to follow the “tech” as it was written. The technical reason for our failure to get repeatable results on these e-meter drills appears at the end of the article.

“Is the date besquirreling-2cd8g0gfore 1990?”

No read on my meter.

“After 1990?”

Again, no read on my meter.

“Is the date 1990?”

And, once again, no read on my meter. Just a slow, creeping rise of the needle as my coach’s eyes glazed over.

I threw my pen down on the table and sagged back in my chair.

This had been going on for over an hour with no results. I just couldn’t continue.

My coach slowly surfaced from the mesmerized condition that he’d settled into and blinked. He looked dazed and puzzled. He had no clue what to do. He’d had no auditor training and, of course, had never done any of the e-meter drills. He was a student from the theory course room who’d been cajoled into holding the cans for me in exchange for my help later with one of his drills on the Student Hat Course.

“FLUNK!!!” snapped Bill, the course supervisor, who had spotted my slouched position and total lack of activity.

“What’s going on here?” he asked more kindly but with a touch of frustration in his voice.

“I just can’t keep doing this!” I cried. “I’ve been on this drill for three weekends now, and I’m not getting anywhere with it.” I was almost in tears. For three weekends – six whole days – I’d been beating this drill to death. Or, more accurately, it had been beating me.

If you’ve ever done The Hubbard Professional Metering Course, you know what I’m talking about.

If you haven’t experienced the agony of this course, you are indeed fortunate.

“The dating drills” – EM-22 E-Meter Hidden Date This Life and EM-25 Track Dating – had pushed bigger and stronger beings than me over the edge and into the abyss of drooling, gibbering insanity.

Part of the problem was finding someone to hold the cans who was willing to sit there and endure the endless, repetitive questions, let alone be truly interested in helping you get through these two drills.

“Is this date before 1980? After 1980? Is it 1980?”

If you were lucky enough to get a read and narrow it down to a range like “after 1980 and before 1990”, then it was, “Is the date 1981? 1982? 1983? 1984? 1985? 1986? 1987? 1988? 1989?” over and over again – unless you got one of those blasted years to read.

In order to get a final pass on EM-22, you had to use your e-meter to locate the coach’s this-lifetime date in the form of month, day and year. A date like June 15, 1992. With NO flunks.

Bill, as the course supervisor, was just as frustrated as I was, and possibly even more so.

Since I’d been on this one e-meter drill for three straight weekends, that meant I’d made no progress on my check sheet and had made no student points on the e-meter course. As a really good, fast-flow student, I usually made well over 1,000 points a day, sometimes even breaking 2,000. A golden student. But for six days now the only points I’d made were from helping other students with their drills. A paltry amount compared to my usually high stats.

“You can go back to the theory course room,” Bill told my coach. The poor guy stood up stiffly, tried to get the circulation back into his legs and stumbled out of the room, glad to be free from the mind-numbing activity.

Bill slid into the coach’s seat, scribbled a date on a piece of paper (hidden from me) and picked up the cans. I got a can squeeze and checked Bill’s metabolism. We were all set. Bill made himself more comfortable, putting his hands in his lap, and we started the drill.

“Is the date before 1980?”

No read on my meter.

“After 1980?”

The needle on my meter instantly dropped about an inch to the right, indicating that the date was after 1980.

WOW! This was more like it!

“It is after 1980,” I told Bill as I was supposed to do when I got a read like this.

“Yes, it is,” he agreed smiling.

I continued the drill, easily locating the year, then the month and finally the day.

“That’s a pass!” announced Bill, putting down the cans and showing me the date written on the piece of paper. He initialed EM-22 on my check sheet, got up and returned to his role as course supervisor.

I was elated! I’d finally done it! This wasn’t that difficult after all. I figured you just needed the right coach. Or something. I didn’t really care. I’d gotten through the drill at last!

The next two e-meter drills took a few course periods to complete. As with the dating drills, I had to find other students who were willing to help me by giving up a considerable amount of their own study time, and I, in return, had to spend time helping them.

The other factor was finding people who were “sessionable”. This meant that they had to have nothing going on physically or mentally that would interfere with the desired reaction of the e-meter while doing the drill.

Then I was ready to start EM-25.

For EM-25, the passing standard was to locate the coach’s made-up past-track date down to the second. Something like 56 trillion, 276 billion, 345 million, 829 thousand, 100 years ago, 3 months, 4 days, 6 hours, 15 minutes and 10 seconds. Again, with NO flunks.

Emboldened by my success on EM-22, I read the drill, found someone to hold the cans and explained the drill to him. He wrote down a made-up whole-track date (which he kept hidden from me) and we got started.

First, I had to establish the “order of magnitude” of the coach’s date. In other words, how big a chunk of time into the past were we looking for?

“Is this the order of magnitude of seconds?”






“Tens of years?”

“Hundreds of years?”

“Thousands of years?”

“Tens of thousands of years?”

“Hundreds of thousands of years?”

“Millions of years?”

And so on . . . up to “Hundreds of quadrillions of years?”

Nothing. No read.

I went back to the beginning and did it over and over and over again, trying to get a read – or even a tiny tic – that would indicate that I might be in the right area of the time track.

I finally had to give it up because it was close to lunch time and my coach’s stomach began to rumble, a sure sign that I wouldn’t get the meter to read unless I asked him, “Are you hungry?”

After lunch, I started in again. It was like EM-22 all over again but even worse. Just try saying, “Quadrillions of years? Tens of quadrillions of years? Hundreds of quadrillions of years?” and all the rest of it, over and over and over again, without getting your tongue tied into a permanent knot.

I went home deflated and discouraged.

Bill didn’t look too happy either. I’d seen the CO (Commanding Officer) of LA Org talking to him earlier in the day. She was a hard-ass Sea Org member who didn’t accept “excuses” for low production from any of her staff but especially not from the GAT course supervisors.

Over the next few weeks, I settled into EM-25 and just accepted the fact that I would be on it for the rest of my life. I gladly and eagerly volunteered to help other students so that I could escape from the tortuous drill and earn some student points.

Finally, Bill had found a coach for me who had a reputation of getting students through the dating drills in no time. This man wasn’t a student from the course room. He was a staff member from LA Day who just happened to be in the org and who had offered to help.

We got through the “order of magnitude” section of the drill discovering that the date was tens of thousands of years ago. Next we narrowed it down to 60,000 years. And finally we located the exact date in the form specified by the drill’s passing standard.

All three of us were elated – me, the coach and Bill.

I was not the only one who had been running into the brick wall of the dating drills. Every single Pro Metering student had become hopelessly bogged on these drills. We all hated them. We were all frustrated. We all spent weeks and sometimes months on them. The CO could be depended upon to push Bill – HARD – when this happened.

And, in the end, our amazing course supervisor, Bill, got all of us through these drills. If he couldn’t find one of the few coaches who could “make the meter read” on the dating drills, he would himself sit in as coach. Every time he did this, we got reads immediately and passed the drill effortlessly and rapidly. It was pure joy to have him hold the cans for us! Passing the drill was really so easy!

Early on, I had noticed that Bill’s reads had a slightly odd quality to them, but I dismissed this as something that was only peculiar to him as a being. He was a very dynamic individual, just crackling with energy, and I assumed that this quality probably manifested itself in his reads.

Eventually, I went on to complete The Hubbard Professional Metering Course and routed onto Academy Level Zero.

And guess what? There on the check sheet for Academy Level Zero were all the e-meter drills, including my old friends EM-22 and EM-25.

A Level Zero auditor doesn’t need to know how to find a date in order to run the Grade Zero processes. So why in the name of heaven and hell were these drills included on the check sheet?!!!

It turned out they were on ALL the Academy Level check sheets in spite of the fact that they were not a tool that you would use until you learned how to do certain actions on Level Four. Those of us who were on Academy Level Zero hated these two drills. Knowing that we would never use them while auditing Grade Zero processes only made matters worse. It was making our time on course longer by weeks and weeks – all for nothing!!!

One of the students officially protested and ended up being ordered to ethics to get sec checked to handle her “counter-intention”. It costs her thousands of dollars and got her nowhere. In the end, she left the church to start her own field practice and was declared a Suppressive Person. So we knew that questioning the presence of these two drills on the check sheet was NOT an option.

But we had Bill. And we knew Bill could get us through these drills just as he had done when we were on the metering course.

Bill was the head GAT-trained course supervisor. He had come back from getting his GAT training at Flag as an enthusiastic and eager man. He was always uptone and helpful. He worked diligently to get his students through their courses with a good understanding of their materials. He was a truly dedicated course supervisor, and we all loved him. His willingness to act as a coach on the theta-sucking dating drills was just one of the many things he did that endeared him to us. He was brilliant and funny and he loved the tech. He himself was a trained auditor. We knew we were in good hands. We were all getting through our courses and winning as students with Bill’s help. He really cared.

We were all aware that Bill was under tremendous pressure to get his stats up. These stats were student points and student completions. The CO was on Bill’s ass every day. We all wished she’d just stay out of the course room and let Bill get on with it. He began to look grey and haggard after his bouts with her.

But he always bounced back and was in there pitching – here, there, everywhere – helping his students.

Then, one day, we didn’t have Bill.

He just disappeared.

The new course supervisor had the IQ of a mentally defective jelly fish, no auditor training and was completely incompetent. She had no clue how to help us. She was trained as a course supervisor, but she applied what she had learned so rotely that it was like having a robot for a supervisor.

When we asked the other staff members where Bill was, we were met with blank faces and no answers.

Finally the story came out.

Bill had been the subject of a Scientology ethics action called a Committee of Evidence, something that is pretty drastic. He had been found guilty of all the charges against him and had been declared a Suppressive Person as a result. He had been routed off staff and was on longer able to communicate with anyone in the org.

Ordinarily, the Findings and Recommendations of a Committee of Evidence are shown to anyone and everyone who has been affected by the person against whom this ethics action is taken. However, the students had been shown nothing and the staff all remained as silent as clams.

Finally, I went to see the Ethics Officer and asked her why Bill had been taken off post and dumped like so much stinky trash.

She reluctantly let me read the Findings and Recommendations. My jaw dropped as I ran my eye down the long list of Bill’s crimes and high crimes.

Driven by the demands and heavy pressure from the CO, Bill had obviously solved the problems of his post in his own creative and – to me – amusing way.

On the list, one little gem stood out above all the rest. Bill had gotten his students through the dating drills by taking the position of coach and then, with his hands under the table, squeezing the cans to simulate a read when the student asked a question that should read.

No wonder Bill always put his hands in his lap when he helped anyone with the dating drills!

No wonder I’d noticed that his reads had a peculiar quality to them!

What I’d been seeing had been short, rapid can squeezes and not legitimate “falls” of the needle.

Smiling sadly, I shook my head. Poor Bill.

He’d been dealt a bad hand and had played it the best way he could. I didn’t blame him.

He had truly wanted to help. Left to his own devices and with no pressure, I’m sure he would have found a legitimate solution to the problem of getting his students through those damn drills.

I saw Bill a few weeks later. He looked like a completely different person. Freed from the pressure to produce beyond what is humanly possible, he was relaxed and happy and laughing and was doing very well in life. A far cry from the grey, haggard person he had become in his last weeks on post. I was glad that he had landed on his feet.

The church had pushed a top performer to the breaking point, crushed him with heavy ethics, then declared and expelled him; a pattern that seems to have become more and more prevalent in recent years.

The church is basically making brilliant enemies out of people who had once been loyal – and brilliant – followers.

Not a very smart move.

In the end, there will be no one left – except the incompetent robots.

KSW advocates are advised to read no further due to possible danger from severe cognitive dissonance.

Here is the true explanation for what Kathy and many others have experienced on these drills.

Following LRH Technical Bulletins blindly leads one into a bewildering maze of inconsistencies and errors which cannot be questioned. Any attempt to find the truth is met with the robotic command, “Find your misunderstood word!” If you persist, you will eventually reach a state of indoctrination where black is white and LRH is never wrong.

These dating drills ignore the fact that e-meters read on charge and substitute the datum that following the directions will produce correct results. A random date produced by a coach will have little or no charge to begin with, so doing a drill to use an e-meter to locate the date is an exercise in futility. Passing the drill requires a highly cooperative coach who can fake reads at will. I know this from personal experience.

The other fallacy is creating and using this drill is that there is NO NECESSITY to whipsaw the preclear in a session to get a date more accurate than “a long time ago” or “the time I stood on the rock and they shot me.” Hubbard seemed to have a fixation on accurately dating incidents rather than taking the preclear’s or entity’s origination as required by the Auditor’s Code.

In 35 years of auditing everyone from raw public to OT8s, I have never required the use of Dating and Locating to handle the charge on an incident. I found that good two way communication with ARC does an excellent job in seconds.

Number of views:30915


blueplanetfree  on January 27th, 2015

Also the emetr reacts to the reactive data or reactive mind, no to the analitical mind so if the coach KNOWS the date there is no way you will get a reaction of the needle
I have done these drills without a fixed date known previously like “your first kiss” and it has worked fine. As we were getting near the date, the coach found out it at the same time as the student

Pericles  on January 27th, 2015

Phew!!! That blew BPC for me. Never in all my auditing did I ever have to search for the “magnitude” of years. When I trained, doing EM drill 22 and 25 seemed senseless to me. And you’re right, whenever an objection came on the line it was either find your MU or off to see the MAA. I am so glad that’s over! …….FOREVER!

David Cooke  on January 27th, 2015

Great article, and liable to blow some charge from almost anyone who’s done any Academy training.

An additional outpoint with these drills might be that they were validating time, and time is a lie. Precise dating could have some workability with a brand new preclear, for whom the difference between past and present might be an important cognition. But not for someone who has gone clear on dianetics, or learned to timebreak using TROM. When I put my attention on the night I was born in 1949, it isn’t 66 years ago – it’s right here and can be viewed in present time.

janedoe2  on January 27th, 2015

I loved your article, Kathy. I shared your same frustrations on e-meter drilling. And I also trained under Bill Skrifvars, an excellent Sup and coach and delightful person. Now that he has been declared, has he left the church and joined the Indies outside? Or is he on the RPF? What is he doing nowadays?

Kathy  on January 28th, 2015

Dear Blueplanetfree,
I LOVE the idea of doing these drills using something like “your first kiss”! THAT would have been FUN!
Kathy 🙂

Kathy  on January 28th, 2015

Dear Pericles,
I’m glad that blew BPC for you. It did for me,too when I wrote it. I’m so glad you told me that you never used “magnitude” in your auditing – I often wondered if anyone did.
Kathy 🙂

Kathy  on January 28th, 2015

Dear David,
Good point! And you don’t need any further “dating” for your birth than “the night I was born” in order to recall that time and look at it now.
Kathy 😉

Kathy  on January 28th, 2015

Dear JaneDoe2,
I’m so glad that you enjoyed my article!
Actually “Bill” was just a name I made up to protect the innocent. It wasn’t Bill Skrifvars, whom I never met. I have no idea where “Bill” is these days or what he is doing, but I’m sure he is much happier than he was beating his head against the wall of getting people through DM’s squirrel training courses. The other major stumbling block for him was trying to teach people to get FNs that swung back and forth 3 times and which looked exactly like the FN in the “reads” film.
Kathy 🙂

John Doe  on January 28th, 2015

In addition to being a huge time waster, as Kathy clearly illustrates, I don’t recall ever having any sense of relief by dating in this manner. For me, accurate dating was always a significance, like “the exact moment I realized I’d been had”.

I was forced to date going clear by this calander dating method and (both times) when I did this, there was always this lingering desire to somehow try to confirm those dates/times. Not a way to get the PC to a release–hanging him with MEST time to validate something in his life.

Kathy  on January 28th, 2015

Dear John Doe,
It’s interesting to hear from someone who actually had dating used on him in session so we get a subjective viewpoint on what it was like.
Like you, I “date” by “events” and not by the calendar. I could give a rat’s ass about the exact date that my first boyfriend told me that he liked me. It is much more meaningful to me that it was in the 9th grade in Latin class.
The other thing that always bothered me about whole-track dating was that “years” are a measure of time on this planet only. What if the incident took place in a universe far, far way where time was measured differently? What guarantee do we have that we’ve automatically converted our whole track into earth years? And, in order to have time, you have to have “change of particles in space”. What if the PC had “spent time” someplace where there was no change of particles? So there was no time for him. (Okay, I have to stop – this is making my mind creak!)
Kathy 😉

statpush  on January 29th, 2015

Interesting. I can tell you all of my CCRDs were an absolute nightmare when it came to date-locate the moment I went clear. Never worked and only resulted in endless correction lists. I never felt it was being done for my benefit.

OldAuditor  on January 29th, 2015

Dear Statpush,

I have repaired at least a dozen botched CCRDs. The basic problem is that they are looking for a moment than has no charge left on it.

If you went clear this lifetime, in session, or during study, or while running a correction list, you probably noticed a big change in your space either at the time or in the next few days. If you went clear last lifetime, and many people did, there is no chance in hell that a church auditor will find that date or will believe you if you originate it.

Staff cases are so screwed up that many staff members get livid when a public person originates that he might be clear and hasn’t spent half a million dollars getting to that state.

Repairing a botched CCRD takes only a few minutes when it is originated.

Send me an email at oldauditor@workabletechnology.com for more information.

Richard Kaminski  on January 29th, 2015

David Cooke, quite right. Besides using Time to invalidate a thetan, the CoS uses the e-meter, the auditor, the C/S, LRH, ethics-threat, and the whole of a multi-billion dollar, lawyer-enforced, world-wide corporation to subdue your knowingness.

Pretty amazing when you consider their advertising slogan is, ‘Think for Yourself’.

My immense respect for Kathy, who not only did not lose her personal integrity, but more importantly, kept her sense of humour.

John Doe  on January 30th, 2015

Regarding “years”:
The way I’d always explained that to myself was that the event you were trying to date was something that happened in the past.

Since we are familiar with years around our star Sol, that can be use to date. Sort of like calling a distance either kilometers or miles–it’s the same distance just named differently.

Kathy  on January 30th, 2015

Dear Richard,
The only way to survive is to keep your sense of humor!
And MY motto is, “Only do it if it’s fun. If it isn’t fun, make it fun. If you can’t make it fun, don’t do it!”
So keep smiling, Richard, and have a FUN day!
Kathy 😉

LDW  on February 4th, 2015

Ha! My wife and I were 1/4 inch away from being declared for writing a KR on the bullshitedness of the dating drills-especially after the 96 “corrections.”

In retrospect, I wish they had gone all the way with the declare. Would have saved us a lot of money.

OldAuditor  on February 4th, 2015

LDW, Here is an observation to encourage you in handling these things in the future.
In my 35 years of auditing and 5 years of SRT, I have never had to handle an entity or client who was shot for doing what was right,
but I have had to handle hundreds of pcs, clients and entities who compromised their integrity and did something against their better judgement.

If you look at that moment in time and go through all of the justifications for doing what you did, you will find that the last vestiges of charge will blow and it will no longer be an event that you will remember.

I am glad you are out and can celebrate life as a free being now.

Leave a Comment