You are quoting Hubbard . <| sep |> Excellent question ! I ' m thinking an employee who was in charge of putting these sales online today , say his name is Gerry , dropped a turkey leg on his keyboard et voil early sales . <| sep |> If only we could . <| sep |> Updated simple version that calculates the ' Efficiency ' level depending on your Capacity input . Rearranging the formula until it worked properly was quite the pain , didn ' t do that in years . I ' ll leave the tables up for anyone thats interested . <| sep |> Lmao what the fuck was that defense <| sep |> Those are the anomalies I ' m talking about , and I find it unlikely that 7 healthy women would be so drastically different downstairs that we have to just throw the study away . Even with that group from your church , depending on what you are studying about them , those health issues may not even be relevant . I just think it ' s really statistically unlikely that this study happened to research seven women , in which a significant portion , had specific irregularities about their pelvic wiring that otherwise would not be significant in a larger sample . Besides , I find it HIGHLY suspect that no other studies have been made regarding these results , not by the original researchers or anyone else . Research takes money and I ' m not sure this is something that generates a lot of grant money . You can ' t make a claim of factuality about billions of women based purely on a single experiment centering on the subjective experiences of seven . If I write a note with a pen and ask seven women to read it and they all say I wrote it in blue ink , I can pretty reasonably predict that most women are gonna tell me that . And that is really centering on subjective experience . This study used ultrasound and chemical analysis on body fluids produced by women before and during the physiological process of orgasm hardly the study of a subjective experience .