Attacking the founder’s character is a genetic fallacy. Ideas stand or fall on their own merits, not on the biography of the person who taught them.

For most ideas that is right, and Scientology’s teachings can be examined on their own, which the other claims in this case do. The reason biography matters here is that Scientology grounds its authority in Hubbard personally, presenting his research and his life as proof the path works. When a system rests its truth on the founder’s demonstrated results and the founder’s account of those results is not accurate, that is not a fallacy to notice. It is the system’s own standard applied honestly.