As a practitioner of Scientology, wouldn’t he be expect to believe in Xenu?
I clicked your link and read the article, but now that I’m back, I think I might have only dreamed that I read it.
Well, he’s got this here movie to make a splash over.
At least he isn’t throwing phones at anybody.
I guess I’m jumping on the bandwagon here, but I also don’t see anything egregious in stating a belief that intelligent life may exist elsewhere in the universe. That is quite a different statement than saying you believe we have been contacted by those other lifeforms or that you believe people have been abducted by flying saucers.
The idea that complex, sentient life should theoretically occur more than once in a vast universe is not crazy at ally. Carl Sagan, a veritable guru for skeptics and critical thinkers believed it.
Of course, if Tom Cruise really believe the whole Xenu scenario then he believes more than he’s letting on, but, at least publicly, I don’t think he’s said that.
Is that in Episode II or Episode III?
Stranger
I like the thoughts about Xenu raised in this thread.
Personally, I prefer Xena.
C’mon, don’t you think that if he were gay, he’d at least have a better haircut? Maybe some decent clothes?
It’s hard to get a decent haircut in a closet.
I think the reporter was trying to bait/needle Cruise about Xenu, without of course saying it directly. People who are in the know about Scientology would have understood the thrust of the question, and would read into Cruise’s response. Of course, as an OT VII or whatever the hell he is, he could never talk about Xenu in public. Hence, the rather vague nature of the question.
I happen to agree with him that there is a high probability that there’s intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe. At least I hope so-- if we’re the best the Universe has to offer in terms of brainpower, then damn! How disappointing!
I have no doubt about it-- I would’ve done the exact same thing!!
I suspect the reporter asked the question because Cruise’s latest movie is about alien critters. (Similarly, I suspect most of the cast of the Exorcist was asked if they believed in Satan when they did interviews back then.)
Um, no. Taking words in an extremely literal way is not my thing, but within this thread I thought it was pretty safe for me to be understood as implying “alien living and intelligent beings”. As for your characterization of “living” and “intelligent”, I can be of no help in that department.
In any case, check this out:
That has nothing to do with your subsequent response and what I tried to make clear, but apparently failed to. The theories and principles you brought up have everything to do with communication with “living and intelligent” aliens that supposedly can only exist in Earth-like conditions. The purpose of defining “other” I cannot see (even at that, there could be humans living in other planets and they would still be aliens… like Superman). What I tried to point out, zero in on, from the beginning is something quite clear: the possibility of communicating with alien life forms, within the limits imposed of being defined as “Earth-like”, has little to do with the possibility of alien life forms, Earth-like and non Earth-like, existing in the first place.
I hope I made myself clear.
I think, as is our wont, we’re going too deep with this. Kythereia pegged it exactly for me–it wasn’t the sentiment, it was the total jerkishness of his reply. He should have said something like, “Well, I think it’s arrogant to believe that we’re alone in the blah blah blah” or at least “I’m not arrogant enough to believe blah blah blah” Starting off by calling the interrogator arrogant put him firmly in the jerk category.
I’m confused–he can’t talk about Xenu? The core of his belief? Why not?
It’s better that the accoloytes don’t hear the truly whacky shit until they are emotionally and financially invested in the cult, and hence less likely to reject it based on that bizarre-ass shit.
If you already spent half your income, you’re going to be less inclined to admit you were fooled and it was for nothing.
The problem is not with the belief but with the assholishness of the response.
Indeed, you cannot. And why you think you can be of help to TYM is a mystery. He made a simple remark, the meaning of which seemed perfectly plain, as I described. I commented on it. He rejoined that it was his opinion apart from other considerations. I granted him the simple decency of respecting his opinion.
Then, suddenly, you appeared and began to parse the penumbras and interstices of our brief chit-chat, offering your take on the metaphysical essence and ontological form of unearthly critters. And now I find myself engaged with a charming man (or handsome woman) who tosses out the classically condescending, “Um, no,” rhetorical vice. You’re like one of those people at a party who is constantly blurting out, “Did you know that so-and-so?” — the Cliff Claven of the room.
The purpose of defining “other” is to understand what TYM meant. Look out your window. See those bipedal creatures? They are called “other people”. As you acclimate to society, you will discover that they often can manage to communicate with one another despite the absence of your interference.
Hope springs eternal, doesn’t it.
I wasn’t helping him. Again, something I didn’t say. Your posts are somewhat bewildering and annoying. :dubious: All I said was that your links had nothing to do with what he actually said. Do I really have to be the original poster to point out certain inconsistencies (that they need to be or not is besides the point)? I can’t understand why you would get upset or think that I’m stroking my ego in some way. I am truly baffled by this discussion.
Wow. Just wow.
This is incredible. 
I’m having my first big fight on this board when it was never my intention. Outstanding!
Yeah, I don’t get it.
That is sufficient hijacking for this thread. I don’t think my continuing to post trying to decipher what exactly it is that ticks you off will do any good to the thread or either of us. Simply put, I expect another ass beating out of the blue. But be my guest, have the last word on that sexy condescending tone of yours.
Does anyone else wonder when Steven Spielberg will bust a nut and lose it over Cruise’s personal nuttiness overshadowing the director’s movie? Sound’s like it’s a well-timed remake of a story meant to inhabit humankind’s darkest paranoia of invasion, in a time when those panic-stricken areas bear examination. Now, there’s all this Tom Tom drumming. Guess it could whup up interest in the movie, due to pitiful saturation, but I’d imagine Spielberg would just like to have less tainted daisies springing up around his movie.
Did think about where to post this in the several Tommy-Gunning threads, chose this because of the ET interest, and, therefore, a smidgen of Spielberg movie connection, if anyone knows entertaining quips.
What’s condescending about that?