He mentioned it because the was brought up earlier in the thread. Quit taking everything so personally. It's too predictable at this point.

Scientology is a body of religious beliefs and practices launched in May 1952 by American author L. Ron Hubbard (1911–86). Hubbard initially developed a program of ideas called Dianetics, which was distributed through the Dianetics Foundation. The foundation soon entered bankruptcy, and Hubbard lost the rights to his seminal publication Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health in 1952. He then recharacterized the subject as a religion and renamed it Scientology, retaining the terminology, doctrines, the E-meter, and the practice of auditing. Within a year, he regained the rights to Dianetics and retained both subjects under the umbrella of the Church of Scientology.

Hubbard describes the etymology of the word Scientology as coming from the Latin word "scio", meaning know or distinguish, and the Greek word “logos”, meaning “the word or outward form by which the inward thought is expressed and made known”. Hubbard writes, “thus, Scientology means knowing about knowing, or science of knowledge”.

Hubbard's groups have encountered considerable opposition and controversy. In January 1951, the New Jersey Board of Medical Examiners brought proceedings against Dianetics Foundation on the charge of teaching medicine without a license. Hubbard's followers engaged in a program of criminal infiltration of the U.S. government.

Hubbard-inspired organizations and their classification are often a point of contention. Germany classifies Scientology groups as an "anti-constitutional sect". In France, they have been classified as a dangerous cult by some parliamentary reports.

Your responses are getting so predictable. You really need to up your game.
Yeah, real smart. Nice copy-and-paste definition, Chula. :rolleyes: I know what it is. I asked how you guys believe the album references it. I love that album and I've never noticed any reference to that quasi-religion in it.

Winner winner chicken dinner

Unsurprisingly, I'm going to be raving about this album. Well, do any of us suggest albums we think are crap? Funny thing is, I was (and still am) not really ever a Prefab Sprout fan. I knew their singles - “Cars and Girls”, “Appetite”, “When Love Breaks Down”, “The King of Rock and Roll” - and while I liked some of them, I was never that interested that I wanted to buy their albums. I still don't know why I bought this one. Maybe it was mentioned in a magazine I was reading at the time, maybe I heard a song on the radio (though I don't think so), maybe someone recommended it to me. I don't know. What I do know is that from the moment it began I loved it. For me, it has everything: memories sweet (“We Let the Stars Go”) and sad (“Doo-Wop in Harlem”), songs about a fear of commitment (“The Wedding March”), even vague misogyny (“The Ice Maiden”), and namechecks such luminaries as Elvis and Moondog, even giving a guest role to God himself!
1. What were your VERY FIRST impressions on listening to the album, say from the first five minutes in?
Oh man I love this!
2. What did you think of the opening track?
A great, powerful, upbeat and energetic start, and I hoped the rest of the album would live up to the promise of this track. I needn't have worried.
3. What did you think of the next track?
I wasn't so wild (sorry) about this one but it was okay. The singing here on “wild” (with the sort of upward inflection) bugged me a little.
4. Did you like the vocalist? Hate him/her? Any impressions? (see note 1)
Yeah I like Paddy McAloon. He has a sort of Irish inflection to his voice and I like how he sings.
5. Did the music (only) generally appeal to you, or not? (see note 2)
Pretty much all of it, yes. Maybe not so much on “Michael”, but otherwise yeah.
6. Did the album get better or worse as you listened to it (first time)?
n/a
7. What did you think of the lyrical content?
I love the breadth of themes. Using Jesse James as subject matter is pure genius, imo, and then he tops that by taking the persona of God (ego problem here, Paddy?) but there's plenty of room for simple love songs and some social commentary.
8. Did you like the instrumental parts? (see note 3)
n/a
9. What did you think of the production?
Pass as ever
10. Did you know of this artiste prior to listening to the album, and if so, did that foreknowledge colour your perception of this album?
Yes, as per the introduction and kind of yes; I wasn't sure this would be for me. But I was pleasantly surprised.
11. Is this, generally, the kind of music you listen to or not?
Yeah I'd say it is. I'm not the biggest fan of pop but I can listen to it, and I like some/most pop-rock.
12. Assuming you listened to the album more than once, on repeated listens, did you find you liked the album more, or less?
n/a
13. What would you class as your favourite track(s), if you have any?
I like pretty much everything here, but would single out the title, “Jesse James Bolero/Symphony”, “We Let the Stars Go”, “Doo-Wop in Harlem”, “Moondog”, “Paris Smith”, “The Wedding March” and “One of the Broken” as favourites.
14. And the one(s) you liked least?
Nothing really, but if I was forced to choose it would be “Michael” and “Machine Gun Ibiza”, maybe add “Wild Horses”
15. If the album in question is a debut, did that fact allow it, in your mind, any leeway, and if so, was that decision justified or vindicated? (see note 4)
n/a
16. Are you now looking forward to hearing more from this artiste, if you have not heard any of their other material?
I intend to listen to more, yes
17. Were you surprised by your reaction - positive or negative - to the album?
n/a
18. Did the album end well?
Yes, there's a beautiful bittersweet ballad to end a fantastic album

19. Do you see any way the album could have been improved?
No
20. Do you think the album hung together well, ie was a fully cohesive unit, or was it a bit hit-and-miss?
I think it hung together well on certain themes, but perhaps went a little askew here and there.

A pure 10/10 for me.

Scientology, New Age, whatever fits, it was said tongue in cheek but you want to rationalize a wry observation and thus dismantling it of its humor. I hate to say it, but you are playing Spock to my Captain Kirk end of episode cheeky banter.

You're not really a Prefab Sprout fan. [see quote below] So I am surprised that you even took offense over something rather benign, not being a hardcore fan and whatnot. It so obvious it's silly to even point out, but nowhere in my post I said that "your album sucks, I prefer mine." It's seems you throwing your toy out the pram cause I preferred Blurred Crusade over it. Still, if you only stuck to the original phrasing and not made up your own, it would leave your album plenty of room for being somewhat moderate good to almost very good, but not very good to extremely good which is the category Blurred Crusades falls in. And not the "totally sucks" like you interpreted it. You could have easily taken another route and said "Wow Neo, you really didn't hate the album, that's awesome!" But no, you rather rage on like Dr. McCoy in a crisis.

Star Trek?

No "Bones" about it.

Does that character have anger issues?

Well when under pressure to perform he does have an quick emotional outburst and that'll give rise to him saying something like "Dammit Jim, I am a doctor not a brick-layer." That is how his character is suppose to be. Bones' character is suppose to represent strong human emotions and that is to contast Spock who represents logic and rationality. I'm surprise you don't already know this stuff. Was Star Trek banned in the South?

Bones accidentally injects himself with cordrazine.

I never liked it. The sets are ugly.

I read a lot of sci-fi but I don’t watch it very often.