Talk Heathen 09.33 with Christy Powell, Dr. Ben, Forrest Valkai and friends! 2025-08-17

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well, we've been waiting for it all summer, all year.

Speaker 2 (00:03):
It's today. It's back cruise weekend. We are live in
studio with a full audience. This is peak community for
the atheist community of Austin. We've got five, count them,
five of your favorite speakers on deck.

Speaker 1 (00:17):
It's all happening.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
Grab your phone, whatever your concerned, your quibble, your question,
your debate topic. We've got some of the best brains
of the ACA locked and loaded, plus myself here to
direct traffic and try to keep it all on the rails.
So keep those calls coming and hold on to your
butts because this is rapid fire talk ethen and the
show is coming right now.

Speaker 3 (00:43):
All right, Yeah, look at that.

Speaker 1 (00:48):
That's the energy we love.

Speaker 2 (00:51):
Glad to be here, Glad to be doing this, Glad
all of y'all are here, Glad to be joined by
you good folks.

Speaker 1 (00:57):
Welcome everyone.

Speaker 2 (00:58):
Today is August seventeenth, twenty twenty five.

Speaker 1 (01:01):
I am your host and dungeon Master.

Speaker 2 (01:03):
Of Ceremonies, certified religious trauma therapist, Christy Powell. And joining
me right now is counselor and training Sophia Spina and
former student doctor Ben Hamilton will be joined in a
bit by Scott Dickey and Forrest Valchi.

Speaker 1 (01:19):
But lines are open now, you know.

Speaker 2 (01:21):
I say this basically every time that I host, but
with the Swiss army bag of brains that we have
on deck today, we really are open to all of
your questions about religion, secular humanism, atheistic morality, separation of
church and state, Christian nationalism, creationism, religious trauma, human rights,
queer rights, cosmology, philosophy, science.

Speaker 1 (01:43):
History, life, the universe, and everything.

Speaker 2 (01:48):
All that said, Sophia remind us a little bit about
who you are and maybe who you're hoping to talk.

Speaker 1 (01:52):
To you today. Cool.

Speaker 4 (01:53):
So I'm just some lady and.

Speaker 5 (01:59):
Counselor training, just graduated with my master's in Marriage, Family
and Child Counseling, so that's cool.

Speaker 4 (02:06):
I didn't even think about getting a plaus for that.
I more often just announce things that I do.

Speaker 5 (02:10):
Yeah, I am happy to talk to pretty much anybody,
but I think that talking about kind of maybe some
of the more emotional issues that come up with religion
is definitely one. I'm always intrigued by kind of how
people are making sense or deconstructing, as trite as that
word is, but yeah, I almost feel like the angrier
the better sometimes, you know, bringing on.

Speaker 1 (02:31):
Yeah. Uh, and Ben, how about yourself?

Speaker 6 (02:34):
Yeah, so I'm a physician, I'm also a trans man,
and I want some calls today for why you think
that some god that we can't see wants control of
my body?

Speaker 1 (02:44):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (02:45):
That's that is a fair question. All right, Ben's body
as battleground. All right, I guess we will get into it.
Talk Heathen is a production of the Atheist Community of Boston,
a five oh one c three nonprofit organization dedicated to
the promotion of atheism, critical thinking, secular humanism, and the

(03:05):
separation of religion and government. We're a live call in show,
so get your calls in. We're at five one two
four two or from your computer at tiny dot c
c slash call T. And with that, Ben, let's get
to the Talk Heathen to Me segment.

Speaker 1 (03:24):
What do you got for me? All Right? I'm so excited.

Speaker 6 (03:26):
I don't usually get to do like announced this part
of the Uh huh, I'm so excited. So it is
time for the Talk Heathen to Me segment where we
answer questions, very fun questions. So last week we asked
you to tell us what gap can God always fit into?
And here are the top three answers we had. Number

(03:46):
three from Godwin Absurdum says God will always fit into
the gap between the two contradicting beliefs of cognitive dissonance.

Speaker 1 (03:57):
Hedy concepts.

Speaker 7 (03:59):
Yeah, And number.

Speaker 6 (04:01):
Two from know What says gap God can always fit
into the tithe sized hole in your bank account.

Speaker 1 (04:09):
It's good, it's good work.

Speaker 6 (04:10):
And in first place, we from ri Heathen sixty seven
says the gap God can always fit into is the anus.
We know this because every time a believer tells you
about him, that's where they pull the detailed load.

Speaker 2 (04:25):
Yes, that's amazing, so good picturing one of those never
ending handshake, you know.

Speaker 5 (04:33):
I mean I also feel like that's where my brain
immediately went.

Speaker 4 (04:36):
I'm like, come on, guys, this question but they.

Speaker 7 (04:40):
Used it well.

Speaker 6 (04:41):
Definitely, And we have another question for next week. So
this week's question is what shouldn't you see in the
atheist community? So be sure to put your answers in
the comments section below, not in the side chat in
the comments below, and we'll read the top three answers
next time.

Speaker 7 (05:00):
What do you two think?

Speaker 6 (05:01):
What what do you think we shouldn't see in the
atheist community?

Speaker 5 (05:04):
I feel like that's a tough question because it is
so broad. So I feel like I want to be
clever and I want to be like, here's simple.

Speaker 1 (05:10):
To say something meaningful.

Speaker 4 (05:12):
Yeah, here's some real pithy thing.

Speaker 5 (05:13):
But I'm just like, I don't know, jerkwads like that's
what I know.

Speaker 4 (05:16):
Is like, don't be an ass.

Speaker 2 (05:18):
That's yeah, So say we all, I don't know debates
about Star Trek versus Star Wars because we need to
come together as a community and just unite. It's fine
not be born apart by these things. You know what,
it's Star Trek. You know it's Star Trek. We all
know it's Star.

Speaker 4 (05:37):
Treks, so the answer should be starting.

Speaker 1 (05:42):
So the answer is Star Trek. That's why we're not
debating it anymore.

Speaker 5 (05:44):
Right around our correct answer, right, Yeah, that's yeah.

Speaker 2 (05:49):
Not a formal or official stance of the atheist Community
of Austin.

Speaker 1 (05:52):
Opinions are held by the hosts themselves.

Speaker 4 (05:55):
It's a correct opinion though, so you know.

Speaker 6 (05:57):
But yeah, make sure you get your answers in because
we be the only ones having fun with this question.
I'm sure you all will come answers than ours. Yes,
they always.

Speaker 1 (06:07):
All right, So.

Speaker 5 (06:09):
I just want to mention that we definitely don't do
this alone. So if we could go to the crew cam,
they are the people who really make this happen.

Speaker 4 (06:18):
All the behind the.

Speaker 5 (06:19):
Scenes people we have there, they are WHOA sorry I
might have just blasted out to all there. They really
do make everything happen.

Speaker 2 (06:26):
And these in person shows A specialists so much extraory.

Speaker 5 (06:30):
Yeah, there's people coming in and out making sure like
somebody brought me, uh you know, some water in this
godless bitches mug, which I don't think was pointed, but
I guess we can ask. Uh. Yeah, they really do
do make everything happen. And also we're awesome people, like
I think I don't know if people out there know that.

Speaker 4 (06:48):
We do hang out with them.

Speaker 5 (06:49):
It's not like a host and other It's like they're
actually amazing and awesome and we love them.

Speaker 1 (06:54):
Heard. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (06:55):
Absolutely, Well, with all of that table, setting all of
that excitement, what do y'all say we go ahead and
jump into the first call and talk to Sully in
Virginia who has evidence for the Christian God.

Speaker 1 (07:07):
Sully tell us about it.

Speaker 8 (07:08):
Yeah, so I have deductive evidence that entails the necessity
of God's existence I'd like to present it if you
don't mind.

Speaker 2 (07:14):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely, Please present it to us and let
this be a conversation. Please don't make me feel like
you are just reading to me, because I've been read
to before. So I'm gonna give you the floor. I'm
gonna let you walk us through it, and please be
okay with us stopping you and asking questions, maybe not
accepting something right away, and respond in turn if you would.

Speaker 8 (07:34):
Sure, So, I'm just gonna go ahead and lay out
the argument. So premis one, Every contingent fact has an explanation.
Premise two. There is a contingent fact that includes all
other contingent facts Conclusion one. Therefore there's an explanation of
this fact. Premis three. This explanation must involve a necessary being.
Premis for this necessary being is God. Conclusion therefore God exists.

(07:57):
So which premise do you reject?

Speaker 5 (07:58):
Well? Thank you talking to tell me what a contingent
fact is?

Speaker 4 (08:02):
Is that just anything?

Speaker 8 (08:03):
Yeah? So a contingent fact is just a fact. Yeah,
A contingent fact is just a fact that is true
in the actual world but not true in all logically
possible worlds.

Speaker 6 (08:11):
Okay, So see this whole argument. I mean, let's just
cut to the chase here. This is all this is
all presuppositional, right, we're coming back from. My issue with
this argument is that like you're saying that there has
to be like a cause, but again, like we don't
have to know what this thing is, and we don't
have to ever know what this thing is, And you're
just putting in God and you're you're lumping these things

(08:34):
all together, but you're still not stringing them in a
way that that tells us that.

Speaker 7 (08:38):
The answer has to be God.

Speaker 6 (08:40):
Right, So how do you actually make that leap without
just throwing that into the equation.

Speaker 8 (08:45):
So nothing within the argument was invoking any notion of causality.
This is an argument about an explanatory principle, the principle
of sufficient reason, and explanations are going to be different
from causality. So you're wrong, you're not tracking. The argument again,
is about tension.

Speaker 1 (09:02):
Fact, what is.

Speaker 8 (09:02):
Failing some necessary explanation?

Speaker 5 (09:05):
What is the difference between causality and an explanation? Because
to me those sound very similar.

Speaker 8 (09:10):
Yeah, so a causal relation is going to be a
relation between events, and a explanation is going to be
a relation between constitutive elements that constitute the identity of
some given thing. So it's not going to be the
case that a causal explanation entails some identity explanation or
constitutive explanation, which is what I'm appealing to here.

Speaker 2 (09:30):
Yeah, I mean, you're still making has been pointed out
that leap to God, you know, especially when you told
our call screen or as I understood it, maybe we've
misinterpreted you, but the Christian God, that's still a leap
that hasn't been accounted for.

Speaker 6 (09:44):
And the fact that you're making an argument right now
that you're not leaning into causality however you're you're going
to have to, especially if you're are you bringing in
the Christian God? Is that the God that you're trying
to bring evidence for. Yes, does this God interact with
the physical.

Speaker 7 (09:59):
Re that we are in currently?

Speaker 8 (10:01):
The God causes it.

Speaker 6 (10:02):
But this argument is so okay, So hold on, you
just said that God causes it.

Speaker 7 (10:06):
So are you making a causal argument?

Speaker 8 (10:08):
No, because this argument is an argument from the principles
sufficient reason.

Speaker 6 (10:11):
I really don't I don't care as much about that
you are bringing causality into this now, So what it
sounds like is you're trying to use philosophy to get
out of having to explain the causality piece of it.
And the point is, like you can go down as
many philosophical rabbit holes as you want. I really don't
give a shit because I care about the utility of
what are we doing with this information?

Speaker 3 (10:31):
Right?

Speaker 6 (10:32):
If you're going to use this to convince me that
there's a Christian God that is going to tell me
how to live my life, I really don't care much
unless you can demonstrate that that being actually is impacting
the reality that.

Speaker 7 (10:44):
I live in.

Speaker 8 (10:44):
Yeah. So again, my argument is applying a general explanatory
principle to a global state of affairs, which is the
entire universe. And the argument I gave is a formal argument.
You asked me a question about whether or not God
interacts with the physical universe, and I accept that God
cause is the physical universe to exists. But that's not
what this argument is establishing, right.

Speaker 6 (11:03):
But with the argument that you're giving though with a
problem though, because the problem though with this too, with
the explanatory argument, could I just insert anything else into
where you've inserted God for that, like you're saying that something.
You're trying to explain the origin of everything. But I mean,
we have Forrest Dakey in here that that could tell
you it's Roland, the closet goblin that is in that spot.

(11:25):
So again, like this is just a meaningless argument at
that point, Where are we going with this?

Speaker 8 (11:30):
Yeah? So again the argument entails the necessity of God's existence.
And the reason why you can't insert anything into that
entailment other than God as being a necessary being is
because there's an abductive case that I'm making based on
theoretical virtue about the nature of God's exists.

Speaker 7 (11:46):
What qualities are you giving?

Speaker 6 (11:48):
Let's define it now, let's define your God that you
are using in this spot. If you're saying the only
God can fit in this, what are the qualities of
this God? And why can't something else have those same qualities?

Speaker 8 (12:00):
I'd be happy to in virtue of me making an
abductive inference in favor of the necessity of God's existence.
I need you to demonstrate that you understand what an
abductive inference is before I explain this. Do you know
what an abductive inference is? Go ahead?

Speaker 4 (12:12):
How about you go ahead and tell us so Just to.

Speaker 8 (12:14):
Be clear, you're not capable of demonstrating that you understand
this entry level inference in formal logical.

Speaker 1 (12:19):
Okay, Sally, we're getting a little bit cute. I want
to be really clear.

Speaker 2 (12:23):
Not only have all three of us worked through various
forms of the KLOM and these William Lane Craig arguments
and some of these ideas multiple multiple, multiple times, but
there's footage of me, like a month ago, talking about
how exhausted I am of having to explain to people
who come in with that salty attitude that I've never
heard these arguments before. We've broken them down in so

(12:45):
many different ways. If you're calling this show, I have
to assume that you know that there are valid counterpoints
to all of this, and we are happy to try
and walk you through.

Speaker 1 (12:55):
Some of them.

Speaker 2 (12:56):
But I really don't want to get into this space of, well,
if you're too foolish to understand the things that I understand,
because as Ben pointed out, like the three of us
are not specifically invested in these philosophical arguments. For god,
you know, Sophia and I in particular come from a
much more human centered, liberal arts kind of perspective on

(13:17):
these things. And that doesn't mean that we don't care
or that we're not interested, but you are going to
need to talk to us like we're people in order
for this conversation to stay fun.

Speaker 6 (13:27):
And we have an audience here too, who might not
have heard these arguments before, and so sometimes when we
ask you to number one, ask you to define the
way you're using some of these terms. It's for us
to understand how do we meet in the middle, How
do we understand that we're not missing the point here.
But also for our audience members, maybe someone's watching for
the first time and doesn't know this, it's okay to

(13:49):
kind of work through this stuff together.

Speaker 7 (13:51):
So yeah, we'd.

Speaker 6 (13:52):
Appreciate a bit less condescension because we can throw that
back if you want that.

Speaker 5 (13:57):
But slapping stit that would be then that's more of
an app game.

Speaker 1 (14:04):
Right, this is.

Speaker 8 (14:05):
Way too meta. This is way too meta. Let's stick
with the substance of the argument.

Speaker 2 (14:09):
How about we'll stick with the fact that I have
a microphone and I'm hosting this show and I am
inviting you as a guest to discuss it with me.
If you don't like the rules of the game, you
don't need to play However, if you would like to
explain to us the significance of an abductive argument and
how it helps us further understand your explanation, please do.

Speaker 8 (14:30):
Yeah. So, just to be clear, that's another tracking error
on your part, because the argument I presented is deductive,
and I said, I'm based on the theoretical virtue of
the I.

Speaker 6 (14:41):
Really do not care what you're calling it. Just give like,
let's talk about you just said, well, let's talk about
the substance of the argument. Bring us the substance instead
of if you.

Speaker 8 (14:49):
Keep pivoting to meta. You keep pivoting to meta.

Speaker 2 (14:52):
How is it because they don't like the way you're
talking to us, Sully, and we have a mute button
and you don't.

Speaker 1 (14:57):
We have other callers on the line and you don't.
This is not a high school LD debate. You are
not trying to beat us.

Speaker 2 (15:05):
We are hosting a program and we are inviting you
to join that program. So you're going to play by
our rules, or we'll find somebody else who will. We'd
love to hear your argument, we'd love to help walk
you through it. Sincerely, we will, but we're not doing
this in a Lincoln Douglas style.

Speaker 5 (15:19):
Yes.

Speaker 8 (15:19):
So, just to be clear, do any of you reject
premise one of the argument that every contingent fact has
an explanation?

Speaker 5 (15:25):
Yes, stuff exists, therefore something costs stuff. That's that's what
I got from that, right, Actually.

Speaker 1 (15:31):
As far as we know so far up to this point.

Speaker 7 (15:33):
Okay, No, sure, what I reject.

Speaker 6 (15:35):
What I reject is that you think you have an
answer to what that is. And our position is that
we don't know. It's okay not to know. So my
question is, how do you arrive at such confidence that
your answer is the thing that explains that?

Speaker 1 (15:50):
Yeah?

Speaker 8 (15:50):
Again, because if it is true that every contingent fact
has an explanation, and if it is true that there's
a contingent fact that includes all other contingent facts, and
it would just follow that that fact has an explanation.

Speaker 1 (16:02):
Now, the right.

Speaker 6 (16:03):
But hold on, Sally though, but hold on, hold on.
All you're saying is that things have explanations. None of
this demonstrates that you know said explanation, because I can
follow you with, yeah, sure this stuff has as something
that could explain it, but you have yet to give.

Speaker 7 (16:19):
Me any reason to follow you to your answer.

Speaker 8 (16:23):
Yeah, So I'm giving you the entailment here. If there
is a contingent fact that includes all other contingent facts,
then that contingent fact would have to have an explanation.
But the explanation for that contingent fact can't be another
contingent fact since it's the contingent fact that's explained.

Speaker 7 (16:38):
So, Sally, you still haven't explained it. We still haven't.

Speaker 6 (16:42):
You're still just saying that that stuff, that stuff has explanations?

Speaker 1 (16:45):
What is that explanation? How is it the Christian?

Speaker 8 (16:48):
Because I'm giving you a clear entailment.

Speaker 7 (16:50):
What is your explanation?

Speaker 1 (16:51):
What?

Speaker 7 (16:51):
What do you think? What do you think the explanation is?

Speaker 8 (16:54):
It has to be a necessary fact?

Speaker 6 (16:56):
Well, but what is that? What is the thing that
you're getting to at the end of it? What is
the explanation? Okay, how do you get to that piece?
How do you insert God?

Speaker 1 (17:06):
There?

Speaker 8 (17:06):
I just gave you the entailment.

Speaker 4 (17:08):
Okay.

Speaker 8 (17:09):
Let's so if you're tracking what I'm saying, I'm giving
you a straightforward entailment. If you're tracking what I'm saying,
I can repeat it for you again. But I've repeated
it three times.

Speaker 4 (17:16):
All right.

Speaker 5 (17:17):
I sense that you're becoming impatient, and I get that.
But I'm a big believer that if you can't explain
something to like a fifth grader, then you maybe don't
understand it yourself. So I'm going to ask some questions
you're probably going to think are overly simple, and that's okay.
You know, we have an audience, it's not just us
sitting here. Tell me what an entailment is.

Speaker 8 (17:36):
Yeah, so an entailment is going to be a conceptual
relation between inferences.

Speaker 5 (17:39):
Okay, So that would mean that there are two things
that are related by an explanation.

Speaker 4 (17:45):
Is that kind of it? Or am I not getting that?

Speaker 3 (17:48):
No?

Speaker 4 (17:49):
Okay, could you know what in me like a fifth grader?

Speaker 2 (17:52):
Fifth graders generally don't know what inferences are. Fifth graders
generally don't wait, So we are asking you to explain it.

Speaker 8 (18:00):
A philosophy lecture.

Speaker 4 (18:02):
I feel like if you're Sully, you.

Speaker 1 (18:04):
Don't lecture fifth graders, you're missing the question.

Speaker 6 (18:06):
But also, like, this is a huge pet peeve of
mine that a lot of philosophy bros think that if
you explain things in this overly philosophy jargon type way,
that you're there for inherently more intelligent.

Speaker 7 (18:18):
Than other people.

Speaker 6 (18:19):
But I don't know if you recognize that there are
different fields of study and they each have their own jargon.
Like if I started talking like the way I talk
with other doctors, I think you'd be a little bit
confused too. There's a reason I don't talk with people
that way. So you have a therapist and a physician here.
We need to speak a bit more common language to
be on the same page. It does not make you
more smart than us. It just means we speak a

(18:41):
little bit differently. Please meet with us in the middle,
because if you're just going to pull this ego trip,
then I don't think there's a lot of reason to
talk to you, because it seems like maybe you're more
interested in sounding smart and not actually engaging with the conversation.

Speaker 2 (18:54):
Well, and sure, you beat us, you make us look stupid, whatever,
that's fine, But remember that there are potentially thousands of
people who are going to watch this clip, and I
would like for each of them to not have to
pose it to look up. Okay, so what is an
inference in psychology? We're asking you to explain it to
fifth graders.

Speaker 8 (19:12):
Okay, So the premise that I was appealing to for
the first premise is that every contingent fact has an explanation.
So all that means is that the principle of sufficient
reason is true. And what that is is all that
saying is that all contingent facts are facts that do
not exist in all possible worlds. So something being contingent

(19:33):
means it's true in some possible worlds but not others.
Does that make sense?

Speaker 1 (19:38):
Yeah, following?

Speaker 4 (19:39):
Sure, still not fifth grade level, right, so excuse me,
all right, just that's still not fifth grade level.

Speaker 7 (19:44):
But yeah, but yeah, we're tracking.

Speaker 8 (19:46):
Yeah, So the second premise is just saying that there's
going to be a contingent fact that includes all other
contingent facts. So there's just a contingent fact about all
the contingent facts that there are.

Speaker 5 (19:56):
So there is an extra explanation explaining explanation that would
explain all of the things, all of the stuff that is.

Speaker 8 (20:05):
Well, all of the contingent facts. Because Premise one is
establishing that all contingent facts have an explanation, and so
if there's a contingent fact that explains all contingent facts,
then that fact would have to have an explanation since
it's a contingent fact.

Speaker 6 (20:20):
Straightforward, it sounds like we're getting to a regressive explanation.

Speaker 5 (20:23):
Yeah, like, why is there one explanation that's.

Speaker 7 (20:26):
Not true that much? Where do we end? Where do
we end?

Speaker 6 (20:29):
Then you're going to are you going to say, God,
it's not the river of your explanation.

Speaker 8 (20:35):
Yeah, because the explanation of all the explanation of all
contingent facts can't be another contingent fact that if that
is explaining them. So it has to be a necessary fact.
And that is what is God.

Speaker 2 (20:45):
That is what God is, the deeper magic from before
the dawn of time exactly.

Speaker 6 (20:49):
But again you're you're just asserting that, You're just asserting.

Speaker 8 (20:53):
That that No, no, this is an enviroment.

Speaker 4 (20:55):
Okay, tell me.

Speaker 7 (21:00):
All right, So so what quality is so in this?

Speaker 6 (21:03):
Why is God a necessary fact and Roll in the
closet goblin is not? What qualities differ between these two entities?

Speaker 1 (21:12):
Oh?

Speaker 8 (21:12):
Yeah, because the notion of God that is being entailed
here is a notion of perfect being theism. So God,
what God is, is one fundamental property of absolute necessity.

Speaker 6 (21:23):
Okay, But if I claim the same perfect if I
claim the same thing about Roland the closet goblin.

Speaker 5 (21:29):
Mm hmm, I made up something that explains all facts.

Speaker 9 (21:32):
There were all facts exactly my thing.

Speaker 8 (21:34):
Yeah, So the problem with that is that I have
more of an abductive case in favor of the necessity
of this God's existence than the necessity of your beings existence.

Speaker 6 (21:42):
And again, so here's here's where I have an issue
with getting too deep into the philosophy, because at some
point you're going to have to bring in like a
real world evidence.

Speaker 7 (21:51):
Right, there's some point where you're gonna.

Speaker 6 (21:53):
Have to say this one has actually demonstrated in reality
beyond like philosophy, right, Like your your syllogism is only
as good as as your facts are are sound, right,
Like you have to have like if you can make
a syllogism that says that like grassis carnivorous and I mean.

Speaker 7 (22:11):
I don't know, there might be some carnivorous crass.

Speaker 3 (22:13):
I don't know.

Speaker 6 (22:14):
You can make whatever statement you want, but like that
doesn't you get to the real world. And like your
syllogism could be logically like making sense, Well, but then
it still doesn't mean anything in reality because it's still false.

Speaker 5 (22:27):
We can define ourselves into being correct and then feel
very strongly that we are right because we defined ourselves
into being correct.

Speaker 2 (22:35):
Right, and that's the leap to God part, Like this
necessary being does not need to be the God of
the Christian Bible by any means.

Speaker 5 (22:43):
And doesn't even necessarily need to be a being. You've
never seen any reason to believe that's the case.

Speaker 8 (22:48):
Well, I gave the entailment. We can get back to that.
But just to clarify, if your view is that all
true facts are facts that are a part of the
physical world, like empirical facts, then that's going to be problems.

Speaker 6 (23:01):
That's not at all what I said, Sally, That's all
not at all what I said. Because if you came
in here with like a deist perspective and you said
that there's I believe there's something out there, but it's
doing nothing and it doesn't matter for your life at all.
Like I don't have any reason to care at that point.
None of us really have a reason to care at
that point. And I probably wouldn't be having this argument

(23:22):
because it's meaningless. But the problem is, if you're going
to claim a Christian God that is implications for my
everyday life, like I said earlier, and if this does
interact with the physical world, then we should see evidence
within the physical world that demonstrate that that's the case. Right,
So are you claiming that this god does have impact

(23:44):
on the physical reality? Because if not, Yeah, I wouldn't
care about that.

Speaker 8 (23:48):
I would affirm that. But that's not what this argument
is establishing, and I don't.

Speaker 6 (23:52):
But the problem is your argument your only your argument, Sully,
Your argument only goes so far, like you are mentally
masturbating to the thought of like this defining yourself into correctness.
But what does that mean for for us? Like, how
do if if the whole thing is we need to
like convert to a religion, why the fuck should I
do that?

Speaker 8 (24:13):
Yeah? Again, because this formal argument is in accordance with.

Speaker 7 (24:16):
That formal argument.

Speaker 1 (24:17):
Is not all?

Speaker 6 (24:18):
All that your formal argument did was say that there's
some kind of explanation. And even if even if there's
some God that is an explanation, that doesn't mean that
I have to change my life, right, you have to
bring something else.

Speaker 8 (24:32):
Yeah, But what it does mean is that you have
rational force to accept the argument and accept God's existence,
because if you don't, then you're irrational.

Speaker 7 (24:39):
I don't though.

Speaker 6 (24:40):
I don't though, because you still haven't given reason to
say that God is that explanation.

Speaker 1 (24:45):
Your God has no description.

Speaker 2 (24:47):
If your God is just the thing that is required
in order for the argument to make sense, then okay, sure,
but it doesn't have any impact on the real world.
It's not burning any bushes, it's not sending down any commandments,
it's not you know, stoning gay people. And so I
don't really care about it, and I think Ben was
pretty explicit on all those points. You know, under other circumstances,

(25:07):
I might continue this conversation a little bit longer, but
I want to make sure to grab another phone call.

Speaker 1 (25:11):
While I still have this group of hosts.

Speaker 2 (25:13):
So I'm going to give you just another minute to
see if we can't clear up what is it that
that maybe isn't getting through on either side.

Speaker 8 (25:21):
Yeah, So just to be clear, are any of you
the types of atheists that has determined that God does
not exist?

Speaker 4 (25:27):
No?

Speaker 2 (25:28):
No, I'm a like a five on the doc and scale.
If we want to go that direction, like I don't,
I think that generally describes most, but not all, of
the folks that speak on this show.

Speaker 6 (25:38):
Yeah, I'm content leaving it in the unknown unknowns. I'm
fine with that.

Speaker 8 (25:41):
Yeah, but if you haven't determined that God does not exist,
then how could you determine whether or not any fact
is related to him? You would have to first determine
that God does not exist, and therefore no fact can
stand in relation to him, right.

Speaker 2 (25:54):
But I don't like I just said, I don't care
about the quote or quote quote unquote existence of God
if that God isn't doing anything to anybody anywhere. If
you tell me that there's a God who created the universe,
who is just fucking off somewhere in the multiverse, like awesome, cool,
you know, so long as he's not like sending floods

(26:14):
to people he hates.

Speaker 1 (26:15):
I don't care.

Speaker 8 (26:16):
Do you think there are any true facts that exist?

Speaker 1 (26:19):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (26:19):
I mean we end up going down.

Speaker 2 (26:21):
I don't know how that's followed exactly, but okay.

Speaker 8 (26:24):
I'm not giving it entailment. I'm asking you because if
you think there are any true facts that exist, there's
at least one true fact. Then if you have not
determined that God does not exist, how could you determine
that that fact or any fact does not stand in
relation to God?

Speaker 6 (26:38):
Because I haven't made a determination either way, I say,
I don't know where all of this leads to the
ultimate explanation, and I really don't care.

Speaker 5 (26:47):
Is there a problem with I don't know here exactly
concept that?

Speaker 8 (26:50):
Well? Yeah, the problem is the problem is if you
have not determined that God does not exist, and you
just say I don't know, then you have no way
of determining whether or not all facts are related to God.

Speaker 7 (27:00):
Are you suggesting that you have to have.

Speaker 5 (27:02):
What I have to prove God does not exist in
order to prove things are not related to this God
I do not believe in?

Speaker 8 (27:10):
Yeah, because how else have you determined that any fact
does not necessitate God?

Speaker 5 (27:14):
I mean, I can say it necessitates fairies, but it
doesn't make it true, Like how do you determine it's
not fairies?

Speaker 4 (27:18):
That we were kind of back to.

Speaker 5 (27:20):
This idea of like why God and why are we
forced into make so.

Speaker 8 (27:24):
There's nothing fundamental on your worldview?

Speaker 1 (27:27):
Nothing fundamental on our worldview?

Speaker 5 (27:29):
Okay, I am here, And yeah starts with that, like
it's made a.

Speaker 2 (27:32):
Much more problem about ourselves in ways that really aren't accurate.
So I do feel like we're circling the same terrictory.
I feel like it's pretty well tread and I feel
like I'm being talked over so.

Speaker 1 (27:43):
With that, so we are going to say thank you.

Speaker 2 (27:46):
I know that you maybe will struggle with this, but
I would really encourage you to go back and watch
this tape and listen to how we say, you know
this doesn't actually mean that, and then you sort of
power through it. And perhaps you're right in some sense
of that word, but I don't think that you are
taking in our very real concerns and our issues with

(28:09):
these arguments. Thank you so much for giving it a
try and for trying to keep it civil with us,
but we're gonna go ahead and move on at this point.

Speaker 1 (28:16):
All right, how are y'all feeling glad to be here? Yet?

Speaker 2 (28:20):
Great?

Speaker 1 (28:20):
For another one?

Speaker 5 (28:21):
I feel like I didn't contribute as much because this
is this part of me that's like a philosop.

Speaker 3 (28:25):
Bro.

Speaker 5 (28:25):
Yeah, and I you know, I love to take things
and bring them down to their simplest explanation. And honestly,
I appreciate you pointing out that you know, it doesn't
mean we're dumber because we don't have the same background,
But like I'm a dumb bitch like I'm sorry I
might be, but if you can't explain it to a
dumb bitch like me, then I'm not really sure how
far you're gonna get with it in general.

Speaker 6 (28:47):
So yeah, yeah, And I mean it's just like, uh, sure, Okay,
I don't have an explanation for how everything came into being.
I don't have an explanation for the ultimate purpose of
the universe whatever.

Speaker 7 (28:59):
So does that mean I should just like not show
up to work? Just okay?

Speaker 6 (29:04):
Yeah, these people are in the hospital, too bad. I
can't explain reality.

Speaker 1 (29:09):
Maybe there's a god.

Speaker 2 (29:12):
Yeah, well, I don't expect everybody who calls the show
to have watched every episode of the show. Lord knows,
but I do just want to point out that we've
gone over and over and over and over this question
from so many different angles, and there's no way that
you were calling this show reading this William Lane Craig's
speech without having seen all of these issues. So all right,

(29:36):
well with that, why don't we go ahead and talk
to Steve in Nebraska?

Speaker 1 (29:40):
Steve, what you got for us today? Yeah?

Speaker 3 (29:43):
Yeah, Hi, Christy, Sophia, and doctor Ben. So I'm calling
it this week because yesterday, when my mom was on
her last breath, my wife, sister in law and I
we we heard a light tap, a light knock on
her hostice room floor, and I was right there next

(30:04):
to the door, and without hesitation, I immediately opened the door
and there was nobody there. And I just wanted to
know if you guys believe in spirits and what that
you guys think that could have been. I couldn't have
been amacking it because two other people heard the same
thing I did. It wasn't a loud knocking noise, so
I wouldn't have confused this knock with the knock next door.

(30:27):
It wasn't anybody plain tricks because immediately I opened the
door without hesitation and there was nobody in the hall.
There was nobody at the door. Yeah, well, are you guys,
you guys explain that? Sure?

Speaker 2 (30:38):
I mean, we'll certainly try to talk you through it
and see what we can do to help you wrap
your head around it. But I really just want to
say that spirits are no spirits, knocks or no knocks
or whatever else. So sorry to hear that that was
your day yesterday, that that's the experience of mourning and
grief that your family is going through. I hope that
we can maybe help bring you some com by helping

(31:00):
you understand that aspect of this experience. But the real
lead here seems to be you lost your mother, and
I'm sorry to hear that.

Speaker 1 (31:09):
That being said, what would y'all maybe suggest, Yeah, okay.

Speaker 3 (31:15):
That piece she's in a better place. I think, I
really I hear that in a better place, and she's
not suffering it anymore, you know, I'm not seeing these
tubes in her and that and pain.

Speaker 1 (31:26):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (31:26):
Well, and it doesn't fall to us to tell you
that that couldn't possibly be true, that there's no way
that she's in a better place, That there is no
better place. I mean, if that is how you feel,
if that's what you believe, we absolutely want to respect that.
And if you are in this place of believing or
assuming that this knocking sound on the door is some

(31:46):
meaningful sign of extra dimensions, of spirit worlds, of these
other kinds of things, I think we might want to
propose some alternate explanations for you to consider and take in.

Speaker 1 (31:57):
Sophia, let me kind of jump to you.

Speaker 2 (31:59):
What would you perhaps recommend is a reframing for this idea.

Speaker 5 (32:03):
So I think the first thing I want to point
out is that we're definitely not here to take away
anything from anyone, and I was speaking to my mother
about her own father's death, and she knows, you know,
my opinions and my views, and she said something about
how she just wants, you know, needs to believe that
what he spent his whole life devoted to was at
least somewhat true. And that's cool, that's fine, you know,

(32:26):
I don't think there's anything really wrong with that. It's
not the conclusion I land on. So I think, you
know what I think of if we're getting to the
specific event of hearing a knock, I think there's a
lot of potential, I guess, possibilities of what that could
have been. One thing that comes to mind immediately. During

(32:48):
the sort of Sherlock Holmes era in Great Britain, there
were two sisters who Spiritualism was a big deal.

Speaker 4 (32:54):
People really believed in spirits.

Speaker 5 (32:55):
Seances were incredibly popular, and they would have experiences that
they would say they could not explain. And these two
sisters usually communicated with ghosts through making through knocking right
and people. They're genuinely believed, and they looked, you know,
tried to find all of these explanations and there was
there was none that they could find. Eventually, it was

(33:16):
shown that they were essentially using their joints because they
had like a funky joint disorder that would make a
popping sound, and that was, you know, how they were
able to create this whole celebrity around it. So I
think it's hard because it can be as simple as
maybe it was a rat who scurried away, you know,

(33:37):
or maybe it was something moved, And it's harder, honestly,
even my ripe old age of thirty four, sometimes sounds
don't come they don't come from an identifiable direction anymore,
like maybe the sound was misplaced. Like there's just a
lot of potentially relatively simple explanations. I don't if it

(33:57):
feels like that matters, though. I think there are things
in my own life I know I'll say, you know,
it's very poetic, or it makes the story that comforts
me or that fits for me, and I'm just going
to keep it.

Speaker 4 (34:10):
And I think that that's kind of okay too.

Speaker 1 (34:12):
How does that strike well?

Speaker 3 (34:13):
I mean, I had that door open as soon as
as we heard. That wasn't just me we heard. We
heard the tap on the door, the knock, it was
a light knock. I opened that door right away. There
was no animals running down the hall with no people.
There wasn't it wasn't a praying spirit. There was nobody there. Okay,
I thought, you know, and I'm not. I'm not prime

(34:34):
to believe in ghost and spirits because I've never had
a paranormal experience in my life. In my fifty nine
years of life, I've never had this. So I wasn't
prime or confirmation bias towards towards this. It was just
totally unexpected and it really, I mean, it just it
scared of the Jesus out of me. It just totally freaked
me out. I mean I had to leave the room

(34:55):
and go outside and have it smoke. I was not
I mean, I was like, whoa.

Speaker 1 (34:59):
I mean, it's a moment of really profound emotion.

Speaker 2 (35:02):
And I think that goes to the narrative piece that
Sophie is speaking on, because there's no way for us
to sit here and prove what it was or wasn't.
And we can certainly offer some common conjecture, and if
you want to, you can, you know, knock.

Speaker 1 (35:17):
All that down.

Speaker 2 (35:18):
You can say that there's no way it had anything
to do with the heating and air conditioning ducks. You
can say it had nothing to do with the possibility
of somebody dropping a you know, creamer packet on the floor,
like any of those things that it could be. Perhaps
it wasn't, and we will certainly never know. But in
that space of big emotion, it's really tempting to say

(35:41):
that you do know, and that it has to be
tied to this or the other thing, when the reality
is you probably hear bizarre or unexplained you know, building creaking,
reshuffling sounds all the time, and you don't worry about
it and you don't think about it because it's not happening.

(36:01):
In this moment of like profound meaning.

Speaker 3 (36:04):
I think I might also through well that was my Christy,
that was my thought that it was the fan in
the room that had rattled on the door. But it
wasn't a rolling noise. It was like a like a
light knock, but it wasn't that loud. It was more
like a like a tap and we all heard it,
not well, not all. There was four people in the
room and three of us heard it. It feels like
it was on the other side of the room.

Speaker 5 (36:26):
A focus instead of on the fact that that hearing noises,
we can't fully explain is pretty common in times of
heightened emotion, we might describe meaning to those things. It
feels like there's this fixation maybe on on specifically what
it was, and I'm kind of curious what would that
change for you? Like, why does it matter to find
a specific explanation for that knocking sound, which I would

(36:49):
see is probably just something that you know was happening
in the building, building settling or some like I said,
someone's joint screaking or something in a way.

Speaker 3 (36:56):
That we I was, I was next to the door.
I just heard the sound.

Speaker 5 (37:01):
So why what does it change for you what you're
saying say it's say, we can't explain it.

Speaker 3 (37:07):
I don't know. I don't know what to think of it,
because I've never really believed in spirits.

Speaker 2 (37:13):
Right, so I think what Sophia is asking is why
are you making that jump like there was a sound?
You don't know what the sound was, and therefore spirits,
how do you how do you make that connection?

Speaker 3 (37:24):
I don't know, just the timing of it well, and
the timing yeah, no, you know, hold on, hold on, definitely, aliens,
I'm seeing these chat comments.

Speaker 7 (37:33):
No, no, come on, but the timing and okay, before.

Speaker 3 (37:37):
With with with with my belief, but that that's that's no.

Speaker 5 (37:41):
Come on, I'm sorry, I'm sorry in the chat, yeah,
I don't see the chat right here, so like we're
not looking at it.

Speaker 4 (37:48):
So I'm sorry if someone's being rude.

Speaker 6 (37:50):
But Steve, the timing. The timing is an important thing too,
because I don't want to discount your experience, and I
fully believe that you experienced this phenomenon.

Speaker 7 (37:59):
You heard something, your family heard something.

Speaker 6 (38:01):
But it's important to recognize too that in the state
that you were in in a time of grief, especially
at the time when everything was happening, even if you
didn't quite recognize it, uh, you probably were in more
of a fight or flight state during that the neurotransmitter
is going around telling you to be more vigilant of

(38:21):
your surroundings. Subconsciously, you could have heard a noise that
was more exaggerated than it normally would have been, just
because you perceived it differently in that moment, and so.

Speaker 3 (38:31):
It wasn't even a loud noise.

Speaker 10 (38:32):
So doctor Bennett, no, but that's the thing.

Speaker 6 (38:34):
It may not have seen no but your ability to
detect that noise may have been better because you were
focused more able to focus on your surroundings because of
your hormonal interactions. And it's something that you're not going
to be acutely aware of because your body's doing all
this stuff without you really paying attention to it.

Speaker 7 (38:52):
But in addition to all these other things, like.

Speaker 6 (38:54):
I do believe that that the timing is important to this,
I think that the circumstances were important to this, and
so we could say, yeah, there there are some significant
reasons why this may have happened. I again don't know
if we can explain these these things. But sometimes sometimes
things that seem more significant maybe are that way because

(39:17):
of a small physiologic change that you just maybe weren't
aware of.

Speaker 3 (39:22):
Yeah, well, yeah, I don't want to she was crying
out to her mom in the knock on the door,
I don't know. I mean, could that have been linked
in some way that maybe she's with with with my grandma.

Speaker 4 (39:33):
Maybe if that's what you know.

Speaker 5 (39:35):
I think I'm kind of curious sort of why you called,
because I think that you know, you heard a soft
knock on a door yesterday in a state far away.

Speaker 3 (39:44):
I didn't hear it. It was we. It wasn't just me, Okay.

Speaker 10 (39:47):
You other people heard that you was a group.

Speaker 5 (39:52):
There's only so much we could We can give lots
of different ideas for what it could have been. There's
no way we could prove that. But I'm curious, like,
what is how do you want us to interact with this?
Because I will say for myself, I don't believe that
it was necessarily spirits. I think I would have a
hard time thinking that. But also that's my opinion states away,
I'm not involved with you or your mother or grandmother.

Speaker 1 (40:15):
And Sophia didn't hear it.

Speaker 4 (40:16):
Yeah, I didn't hear it.

Speaker 5 (40:17):
And I'm curious as too, Like I think if I
heard this story in just real life, if somebody was
telling me the story about their grandmother, I would just
or they're sorry their mother.

Speaker 4 (40:27):
I would just kind of let it.

Speaker 5 (40:28):
Be because if that's what's giving them comfort or giving
them meaning, I'm not going to go out and correct it.
So I'm curious what it is you are wanting in
this conversation.

Speaker 3 (40:37):
I'm just wondering if you guys believe in spiritualism that
there's maybe more to reality than what we can perceive personally.

Speaker 5 (40:47):
No, but it's not an active unbelief. More than I
just have never seen conclusive evidence. And I think, knowing
myself after I'm say, watching a horror movie or something,
how much it feels like the how is closing in
on me after I turn out all the lights, I
know we can be put into a state if it's
heightened emotion of interpreting things in a way that would

(41:08):
maybe confirm to us that there's a spirit there without
there actually being one. So personally I would say that
I don't have an active belief against it, but I
do not believe in a spiritual world, and I think
we can be easily tricked. That doesn't necessarily have to
have any bearing.

Speaker 3 (41:24):
On how you It wasn't just me that was that
heard that it was I wasn't think there were two We.

Speaker 2 (41:31):
Get that, Steve, and I can appreciate why having other
people in that space might help to affirm your interpretation
of events. But what I've heard both Ben and Sophia
try to express that I maybe haven't heard you grapple
with is that our emotional state changes our perception, and
that emotional state is not just you, it's everybody in

(41:51):
the room who is going through that experience and the
ways that they are coregulating and bouncing off of each other.
I don't want to belabor the point, but if if
you're interested in maybe sort of proving this to yourself
or understanding it, better look up the word neuroception, or
some of the ideas around Stephen Porges's polyvagel theory, or
really any great number of interpersonal or neurobiology that will

(42:16):
express that the way that we perceive the world, not
just the way we think about it or the way
that we explain it, but the way we actually experience
it is deeply changed by our emotional experiences. And I
do think that even if we set all of that aside,
you have not investigated every random noise you've ever heard

(42:36):
in your life, but you feel deeply moved to investigate
this one.

Speaker 1 (42:41):
And I have to say it's because of the large
emotions that are attached to it. It makes sense to
want to have an explanation. It makes sense in a
world full of death and loss to want to have
a reason and some amount of hope, and your efforts
to make meaning out of this random sound owned or
something I have a deep compassion for. Does that mean

(43:04):
that it was ghosts or.

Speaker 2 (43:05):
Spirits or anything else I'm inclined to say probably not.

Speaker 1 (43:09):
But I appreciate why you would want to go to
that space.

Speaker 3 (43:13):
Well, I distinctly heard a tap. It wasn't a rattle,
it wasn't the fan. I thought it could have been
the fan in the room rattling.

Speaker 1 (43:20):
I believe that you did.

Speaker 2 (43:22):
And what all three of us are positing is that
the phrase I distinctly heard is maybe not as reliable
as you think. Don't believe everything that you think. I
believe that you heard it. Does that mean anything at
all other than you had the experiential process of hearing
a thing.

Speaker 3 (43:40):
It doesn't Well, I just think there could be more
than the naturalistic explanations for everything.

Speaker 1 (43:46):
Yeah, there certainly could be.

Speaker 2 (43:47):
We're not denying that possibility or potentiality. We're just saying
that we don't see any reason to go there.

Speaker 1 (43:54):
So maybe could be.

Speaker 2 (43:56):
And if it brings you comfort to hold on to
that idea, I'm certainly not going to.

Speaker 1 (44:01):
Rip it away from you.

Speaker 2 (44:03):
The biggest thing I would suggest to you if you
are looking for advice, considering that you called in a
show to talk to us, I think I would share
with you that this has to be a deeply profound
emotional experience, and I might encourage you to focus on that,
to focus on the grief, on the relief, on the pain,

(44:25):
on the whatever else you might be going through here,
and to ask yourself whether these questions of sounds and
spirits might be a bit of a distraction from sitting
in that distress.

Speaker 3 (44:38):
Well, thank you guys giving me some things to think about,
so sure, appreciate it, And you know, I just just
don't think that maybe everything has a natural.

Speaker 1 (44:49):
Yeah, you may well be right.

Speaker 2 (44:53):
We're again, we're sorry for your loss, and we hope
that you take good care at ben place.

Speaker 7 (44:56):
Oh yeah, I think too.

Speaker 6 (44:58):
Since it's so all this is so fresh for you,
I wonder if you know, go think about a little bit,
I mean, process this experience like you've just been through
a lot, and take some time, take whatever time you need,
and maybe revisit this question again on the show in
the future when maybe you've thought over some different details

(45:20):
that maybe you didn't remember, and because I'd be happy
to revisit it, I think right now, it's just it's
especially emotionally charged, and don't deny yourself kind of the
space to process that.

Speaker 3 (45:31):
Well, thanks for the kind of words, doctor bandaga. I
will have to reflect on this and yeah, thank you.

Speaker 1 (45:39):
Yeah, thank you, Steve taking care. We're sorry again for
your loss.

Speaker 2 (45:42):
All right, Well, a somber note to say goodbye to
you to two good folks on but I very much
appreciate you being here and coming and sharing all the lout.

Speaker 4 (45:50):
I appreciate watching you do therapy on a phone call.

Speaker 7 (45:52):
That was pretty.

Speaker 1 (45:55):
That's great. How did that make you feel?

Speaker 5 (46:01):
Even I'm a good enough therapist to know, and I'm
barely a therapist.

Speaker 7 (46:04):
Yet you don't just say that.

Speaker 2 (46:07):
All right, Well, Sophia Spina and doctor Ben, thank you
so much. On deck, I've got Scott Dickey and Forrest
Valci while we get everybody swapped.

Speaker 1 (46:18):
Out and loaded.

Speaker 2 (46:19):
I do want to remind people that below the chat
we are running a direct fundraiser. If you like what
we do, please contribute. Consider contributing to our cause. The
ACA keeps one hundred percent of your donation. YouTube does
not take a cut. And I am very excited and
happy to announce that on August twenty ninth, the Atheist
Community of Austin will be hosting a presentation by Seth Andrews,

(46:41):
with an introduction by Genetically Modified Skeptic and the Antibot
join us at the round Rock Public Library for an
evening of pizza, conversation and critical thinking. Tickets are available
right now tiny dot c c slash Evening with Seth
and with that, as they're getting miked up, I'd like
to enter Forrest Valcai and Scott Dicky.

Speaker 1 (47:04):
Hi.

Speaker 2 (47:05):
Everyone, excited to have y'all on. We do have some
calls on the line, but I gave the folks earlier
an opportunity to say a little bit about who they
are and who the hell they're hoping to talk to today.

Speaker 1 (47:18):
What you got for me after you, sir ah?

Speaker 9 (47:20):
Well, my name is Scott Dickey. I'm a math educator
for twenty five years and get to hang out with
a bunch of cool people today. So I'm looking to
get some cool calls.

Speaker 1 (47:29):
So let's cool calls.

Speaker 9 (47:30):
Let's filter out.

Speaker 1 (47:31):
The non call let's try nerds need not apply. Well
actually no, yeah, like this is the wrong show for that.

Speaker 11 (47:40):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (47:40):
No, we already brought in a Star Wars versus Star
Trek conversation, so yeah, bring on the nerds.

Speaker 9 (47:47):
Bring out your nerd definitely, yes, definitely.

Speaker 12 (47:50):
Yeah, I'm Forrest VALKI. I'm a biologist and a science communicator.
I don't know how deep we should. I owe undergrad
degrees in science education, Liberal Arts and biology, General Biology,
and integrated biology with the organismic and Evolutionary bioconcentration, masters
in bioanthropology, and another one in biomedical sciences, and I'm
currently a PhD student in Oh there we go, in

(48:12):
biochemistry and molecular biology. I freaking love biology, and I
especially love evolution. So I'm really hoping to get some
creationist calls. We get somebody wants to call it and
telling me why evolution isn't real. And that's the thing
that I've been studying for the past decade. I want
to know about it.

Speaker 2 (48:25):
So those evolution exactly, yes, yes, yes, yes.

Speaker 12 (48:30):
I also want to give a shout out to Sully
for reminding me why I became a biologist and not
a philosopher. That was an incredibly refreshing reminder of why
science rules and staring at your own navel does not.

Speaker 1 (48:43):
Yes, fair, fair.

Speaker 2 (48:45):
All right, Well, we do have some open lines, we
have some callers coming up, but I'm told that right
now we actually have a in studio question from somebody
here live.

Speaker 1 (48:57):
We're going to cut to the crowd. What can we
do for you?

Speaker 9 (49:00):
Hello here we can hear yeah, yeah, okay, awesome reporting.

Speaker 13 (49:06):
Following up the previous call, like, I know that I
grew up in a house that was old and creaky
and not well lit, so there was weird things that
ended up happening that looking back, I could definitely contribute
to more scientific explanations. Was there anything for y'all in
like your youth that was just weird? And looking back

(49:28):
you're like, oh, I can explain that now that I
have more knowledge or access to the internet in order
to look up an explanation.

Speaker 1 (49:35):
Oh man, are you ready for my life's story, because.

Speaker 2 (49:39):
So much of it, you know, as a autistic kid
growing up in a evangelical community that was all about
spiritual warfare.

Speaker 1 (49:50):
Everything had a spiritual explanation.

Speaker 2 (49:52):
I mean, if the card didn't start, if you found
twenty dollars in your pocket, like that was either God
or the devil at all times.

Speaker 1 (49:59):
Always.

Speaker 9 (50:00):
What was y'all's experience, Well, personally, I've never I was
always about figuring things out. I was about taking my
toys apart. I was always about.

Speaker 1 (50:07):
You investigate the things that went pena.

Speaker 9 (50:10):
Yeah, and so I didn't sleep until I had those answers.
And so so that's not really something that I'm that
I'm familiar with, you know, sitting there wondering and having
those unexplainable experiences. To me, that was just a motive,
a motivation that gave me a direction to go with
my exploration of the world.

Speaker 12 (50:28):
So sure, yeah, I was raised Pagan, so I was
actually I had similar beliefs to what Steve was espousing
in there. And so like when I would feel a
cold spot in the room, my parents would tell me, oh,
that's a ghost, that's there, you know.

Speaker 1 (50:39):
And now I understand a.

Speaker 12 (50:41):
Little bit about how cold works sometimes and it's a
little bit different, right, Or if I felt a particular
kind of way about a particular situation, Oh, that might
be an ancestor looking over and like giving you some
sort of a nudge or whatever instead of just you
probably have some anxiety because you're twelve, you know. And
I think so those kinds of things, definitely I can
look back on and see that, like the deep concern
that I had about the spirit in my room that

(51:03):
was causing me a nightmare probably isn't as compelling of
an answer as there was a train nearby that made
a weird sound or something else that came into it.
And really, over the course of my life, as I've
learned like really critically analyze evidence and think about, you know,
just just what could possibly be real, It's become more
and more apparent that like if we're talking about you know, whatever, ghost, magic,

(51:26):
supernatural thing, something that we don't actually have proof of,
something we don't have anything better than anecdotal evidence for.
And you know the old saying that you know, a
bunch of stories is anecdotal evidence, and a bunch of
anecdotal evidence is called bullshit. So like, if we have
something that we have no better than anecdotal evidence for,
then the most silly, ridiculous, wild, over the top explanation

(51:46):
that involves real things is more rational than that. So
if I, you know, have this experience with someone you know,
knocking on a door, or or I think I hear
a voice or what of like that, you know, either
I hallucinated something, I have been drugged. I could have
just had a psychotic break. There could be a gas leak,
There could be a multi billion dollar multinational conspiracy specifically

(52:08):
with the purpose of fucking with me in that moment,
and there's a doubt. Those are all things that actually exist.
Those are all things that are based in real things,
and that means they're all more rational than thinking maybe
there's this extra dimensional extra plane or reality that we
just don't have any evidence for, and that's what's doing
just as I've grown thinking, yeah, a lot of things,
a lot of things in my childhood. Now I look

(52:29):
back on, I'm like, I can understand why this information,
why this explanation was.

Speaker 10 (52:32):
Unsatisfying, because it doesn't do anything. It didn't solve anything.

Speaker 1 (52:36):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (52:36):
Yeah, if you want me to be a little bit
more specific, I'll say that in particular, the study of
psychology generally, but especially hypnosis and perception really destroyed whatever
lingering vestiges of my faith were still there. There were
so many experiences that I had around like you know,

(52:57):
God perfectly lining up my scale jewel, or of going
to you know, church camp and crying and praying in
tongues and falling under the spirit and seeing visions.

Speaker 1 (53:08):
I mean, we were like really evangelical.

Speaker 2 (53:12):
So like I had all of those firsthand experiences and
they were sincere, you know, they were real for me.

Speaker 1 (53:19):
In meaningful ways.

Speaker 2 (53:21):
And then I began to understand that you really can't
believe everything you think, and that was the biggest thing
that I wanted to stress to the caller.

Speaker 1 (53:29):
It's not that you didn't have that experience.

Speaker 2 (53:32):
At the level of experience in a sensory sense, I'm
sure that you did. And there are so many things
between the outside world and the experiencing self that can
go awry. You know, the mood that you're in, how
much sleep you've gotten, the substances you've consumed, but also
your assumptions about the world, the things that you believe

(53:55):
to be true, kind of create the truth as you
experience it. I really cannot stress enough how just an
introductory book on hypnosis will have you walking around the
world for weeks going oh shit, this is all made up,
because again, at the level of experience, it is made up.

Speaker 1 (54:14):
Yeah. No, definitely. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (54:16):
So I hope that that brings a little bit of
an answer to the question.

Speaker 1 (54:20):
It's certainly a big one. Yeah.

Speaker 9 (54:22):
I would just also quick add that it's not necessarily
I know. I just said that I would always track
down the answer, and I don't I would always try
to figure it out right in there. But I think,
especially when you're dealing with an emotional situation, it's not
necessarily that you need to gave an answer right away.
I mean, we we have this natural inclination to want
to explain things, to want to justify things, to want
to understand, you know, how this fits into my life

(54:45):
and how I view the world. But it's okay to
just experience it and then maybe reflect on it later
in a day and a week and a month and
a year, and you know, you don't have to come
up with the what was the what was the explanation
for that knock at the door? You know, you can
figure that out later. You can just you know, deal
with your griev at the moment and you know, figure
out the details when it's more convenient.

Speaker 1 (55:03):
Yeah, maybe the answer is I was just sad. Yeah,
could be.

Speaker 10 (55:07):
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with just saying I don't know.

Speaker 12 (55:09):
The most available explanation is not the best explanation all
the time.

Speaker 1 (55:12):
Yeah, you can't immediately like leap.

Speaker 10 (55:14):
Yeah, it's it's it's and that's that's fuck.

Speaker 1 (55:16):
Oh my god.

Speaker 12 (55:17):
That's tough, especially when you're in that deeply emotionally vulnerable
place you're hurt for sure, you're scared, you're grieving. All
you want the closure of an answer and just sitting
there with I don't know. It's rough, but it's a
lot more honest, and it's going to do you butter
in the long run.

Speaker 11 (55:31):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (55:31):
Yeah, No.

Speaker 2 (55:32):
I wish I could quote the actual study for you here,
but I I was so shaken in I want to say,
like sophomore year of studying psychology, as we were talking
about the mastery complex and these ideas of how our
brains just so desperately want to feel like we are
in control in a deeply chaotic universe. And there are

(55:54):
really fascinating studies about folks who are diagnosed with cancers,
say who had this like very specific genetic form of
cancer where there was something like a ninety percent chance
if you have this gene, you will have this disease.
And yet in interviews and in all of the survey
research that went around it, people were just so convinced

(56:16):
it's because I spent too much time in the sun,
It's because I smoked in my twenties, It's because I
did this or I did that. Because if we can
have an explanation for something, then it makes us feel
like we are in control of it.

Speaker 1 (56:28):
It makes us.

Speaker 2 (56:28):
Feel like we can stop that from happening again by
changing our behavior, and it stops us from having to
deal with the fact that we live in a random
universe where you know, bread trucks can just hit us
for no reason.

Speaker 12 (56:42):
Do you think also that in that particular case, like
having someone to blame also, and that person blame happens
to be you, who you are the most intimately aware.

Speaker 1 (56:49):
Of you have control over as well, extensibly, Yeah, exactly. Yeah,
I did this thing.

Speaker 12 (56:53):
Not my genes, but I did this thing that allowed it,
and now I have to be mad at myself. I
have someone to take out my anger on.

Speaker 10 (57:00):
Mm hm, yeah, that's interesting.

Speaker 2 (57:01):
Yeah, I mean, it's It's the reason why so many
of us tend to blame ourselves for every tragedy in
our lives, because it makes us feel like we are
in control and that there is justice in the universe,
and divine retribution takes the form of us beating ourselves
up and criticizing ourselves all day. It's hard to work through.
It's something we come to naturally as humans. And I

(57:23):
don't mean to get like too far Afield and preach
my you know, mindful self compassion philosophies, But I preach girl.

Speaker 1 (57:30):
Yeah right, it's so.

Speaker 2 (57:31):
Easy to hate yourself because if you didn't, then you
would have to accept that terrible things just happen all
the time.

Speaker 12 (57:39):
It was funny you mentioned that because that is exactly
when I was Pagan. When I was a kid, I
was taught about that whole, like the secret the law
of attraction and like that what happens to you depends
on your thoughts and your.

Speaker 1 (57:47):
Feet, what you put out into the universe.

Speaker 12 (57:51):
Yeah, and so yeah, you manifested this terrible yea, even
though I didn't believe in a god or angels and
demons all these things. But like when I when I
was when something bad would have happen. You know what, though,
I've been pretty grumpy for the past couple of months.
That's why my dad died that weird way, you know
what I mean, the same thing. It's like, Okay, I
brought this on myself by being melancholic as a regular thing,

(58:13):
and that created the bad vibes that made this person
have this bad day around me.

Speaker 10 (58:18):
And so it's I've never thought about it that way.

Speaker 2 (58:20):
We're a meaning making species. We will find the patterns
in static the longer we stare at it, And it
makes sense that we would want to.

Speaker 1 (58:29):
But again, just don't trust everything you think.

Speaker 10 (58:32):
Epophenian paradilia and all that shit.

Speaker 1 (58:34):
Yeah, it's some good stuff.

Speaker 9 (58:35):
Well, if we can blame, then we If we can't
find a blame, if we can't find a source, then
it might happen again.

Speaker 2 (58:41):
Right, right, exactly, that sense of control of the mastery
over the situation.

Speaker 9 (58:47):
As long as I just don't do those things again,
then everything.

Speaker 2 (58:50):
That my dad won't die again, right, which is how
we get incredibly superstitious about these things.

Speaker 1 (58:56):
We have to do everything in a particular order.

Speaker 2 (58:58):
You can't change your underwear if you want your team
to win, clearly, right, right.

Speaker 1 (59:04):
For thirty years and they still haven't done it yet.
Someday it's gonna work.

Speaker 2 (59:08):
I keep wearing and people keep not proving God, So
would I change him?

Speaker 1 (59:13):
Exactly? Okay, Well, what do y'all say?

Speaker 2 (59:17):
We jump into a conversation with James, who I think
has some questions about the nature of the show.

Speaker 1 (59:24):
James, what's on your mind?

Speaker 11 (59:26):
Yeah, hey, guys, and don't misunderstand me. You know, I
really do enjoy the show I was, you know, watching
for us this morning, debating some knucklehead about you know,
his evolution. True, but it seems a bit kind of
repetitive counter apologetics. I don't care if God does or
doesn't exist. I don't care what people believe or don't believe.

(59:49):
What I do care is that damage religion is inflicting
on this planet and all of us and evangelicals gave
us this current White House. We're living in dangerous times,
and so I would love for this show or other
shows like it to help us mobilize opposition to Christian

(01:00:11):
white nationalism, you know, to highlight the threats to secular democracy.

Speaker 9 (01:00:15):
But I don't hear that.

Speaker 11 (01:00:16):
I just hear these ridiculous arguments about ghosts.

Speaker 1 (01:00:21):
And you know who knows right.

Speaker 11 (01:00:24):
That's kind of my point.

Speaker 1 (01:00:25):
Yeah, sure, it's a fair critique.

Speaker 12 (01:00:27):
I think it's really important to remember that, like those
two are not exclusive categories. The reason why when people
are able to vote for somebody based on what they
think God wants, and you know, I have to be
careful because we're a nonprofit. I can't say too many
things about specific politicians, but the reason why, and I

(01:00:49):
can let the reason why people are able to then
get into this this idea of like, all right, you know,
Jesus told me I have to vote this way, So
I need to vote for the least christ Like person.

Speaker 10 (01:01:02):
In the world, because that's what Jesus said to do.

Speaker 12 (01:01:05):
Is because of those silly ass arguments that we get
on shows like this, and so, you know, the people
who call in and say, listen, I know that God's
real because where else could things have come from? Or
I know I didn't come from a monkey, or because
there must be something upon which all things are contingent,
or whatever the other argument that we get every damn day.

(01:01:25):
Those arguments are common because they're effective if you don't
think about them, and religion is really good at passing
on what I like to call everlasting thought stoppers. You know,
don't question God. Who are you to question the most
wise creature in the universe? And if you accept that
there is no God, then you must have no morality
and all the other bullshit we have to deal with
every day. I hate this microphone. It deserves what it got.

(01:01:48):
All this other bullshit that we deal with on shows
like this every single day. Those simple arguments allow people
to then indoctrinate themselves and lie to themselves to the
point where they vote for and believe and say and
do monstrous things. So I can sit here and argue
about Donald Trump. I can sit here and argue about
Christian nationalism. I can sit here and argue about all

(01:02:09):
this stuff, and boy, I intend to.

Speaker 1 (01:02:11):
But at the end of the day, the.

Speaker 12 (01:02:12):
Most common people that are going to call us, the
most common people that we're going to talk to, the
arguments that are going to get through to the most
people at the most effectively the most amount of time
are going to be those simple things that indoctrinated them
in the first place and cause them to believe in
these things that allow them to make those massive leaps
of logic and of morality that get them to these places.

Speaker 11 (01:02:32):
Yeah, and do you think you're changing any minds?

Speaker 2 (01:02:34):
I certainly have to believe. So I don't know what
you two would say to that question. But I've been
doing this for long enough. And when we have events
like you know, why am I not remembering the name
for back cruise jeez, back Cruise Weekend? When we have
events like back Cruse Weekend, or we come to the
studio library and I get to meet people. I have

(01:02:55):
had so many people come up and tell me directly
and personally, you did this for me, you changed this
for me. And yes, that's the self selecting group of
people who came out for an event like this, But
I do see it in the comments.

Speaker 1 (01:03:09):
I don't think that any one random YouTube.

Speaker 2 (01:03:12):
Clip is likely to be the one that puts somebody's
life on a completely different trajectory. But I do believe
that there's a reason why so many people work so
hard to volunteer and show up to this space.

Speaker 1 (01:03:25):
I do think that it matters.

Speaker 12 (01:03:26):
I think it's really important to point out also that
like it's easy to assume when you see the show,
that the person we're trying to reach and trying to
change the mind of is the caller, and that I
can tell you that's almost never the case. When somebody
calls into a show like this, more often than not,
they are bought in. They are a true believer, and
they think they've got the one argument that we've never
heard before that is going to shatter our worldview.

Speaker 2 (01:03:48):
Actually definitely wasn't on the show last week, exactly right.

Speaker 12 (01:03:51):
And so like those types of calls, when we can
reason through them, and talk about them and be calm
and rational about them. The people whose minds we change
are the people who are listening in, who are on
the fence. The most common deconstruction story I hear over
and over and over is I was looking for good
arguments for God, and the more I tested those good

(01:04:11):
arguments or watch shows like this, the more I saw
those good.

Speaker 10 (01:04:14):
Arguments falling apart.

Speaker 12 (01:04:16):
I was looking for good arguments against naturalism, against evolution,
against whatever, and the more I learned it, the more
I could only find good arguments for this stuff. And
so when people tune into these shows, very often they're
one of three people. Every now and then, it's a
true believer who wants to call and tell us something,
or a true believer who wants to listen to the
show and figure out what the atheist mindset is. Those

(01:04:38):
people don't stick around for long. The other group is
people who have already deconstructed or in the process of deconstructing,
who desperately need some side of community.

Speaker 1 (01:04:45):
They have just lost their.

Speaker 12 (01:04:46):
Family, they've lost their community, they've lost their church, they've
lost friends, they've lost relationships, and they're looking for people
to tell them that they're not crazy and to give
them permission to criticize the religion that they're coming out
of without being struck by light. And the third and
biggest group that watched these shows people who are doubting
and are scared and want very badly to hear somebody
else put on those big, strong arguments and see what

(01:05:08):
they And those are the last fighters for their beliefs
and their faith. And when they see us and be
able to handle those things, that gives them the opportunity
to then start to question things for themselves. And those
are the emails that I get the most. Those are
the people that I meet at things like this. Those
are the things that I get letters in the mail
or comments on YouTube. Is people who are like they've
never called in. But I watch the show every week.

(01:05:29):
I watch you on these different programs, and I've learned
so much about these things. And this allowed me to
question my faith. And the second I question God, he
disappeared and that that's what it's all about.

Speaker 9 (01:05:38):
And I also think it's important to you guys applauded
for that right well, thank you, thank you very much.
But I also think it's important that to recognize what
kind of role our show plays in the larger conversation
as well. I mean, if you say, well, the callers
are kind of repetitive, and that's fine, that's people calling
in to talk to us. It's right there in the
name of the show talk he then we want want

(01:06:00):
to talk to people, We want to have a conversation.
And I think that step alone is a very important
part of the process. And various conversations are gonna ring
with with various callers and various listeners, and and you know,
that's the way it goes. I don't know if you've noticed,
but we actually have a caller on the on the
phone right now that we're talking with that has a
different a different topic that we haven't talked to earlier today.

(01:06:22):
And so I think the fact that you wanted to
call in and talk to us about that, I think
that adds to that conversation that forces us to look
at this process in a different way that maybe we
weren't seeing before. Maybe it, you know, it'll take us
in a different direction than some of the people that
we were talking to earlier. But that's all part of
the overall conversation. We all contribute, we all gain from it,

(01:06:43):
and I think that's a healthy way to have a society.

Speaker 1 (01:06:46):
Is that open?

Speaker 5 (01:06:47):
Uh?

Speaker 9 (01:06:47):
That open forum for discussion of these kind of things.
And I'm I'm grateful that you felt comfortable to call
in and present us with this, uh, this question because
it gives us an opportunity to address the exact issue
that you were bringing up and to approach these issues
with from a slightly different direction or you know, focusing

(01:07:07):
on a different aspect of that conversation. Does that make sense?

Speaker 11 (01:07:10):
It makes total sense. I really appreciate you taking my
call and your you know, you guys are brilliant, love
loveless things are here.

Speaker 1 (01:07:18):
They are a lot of times. It's just good.

Speaker 11 (01:07:21):
It's good comedy. I mean, there's a lot for us.
Just just cracks me up with some of his conversations.
People that want to debate a biology PhD. You know, student,
you know, more power to you.

Speaker 1 (01:07:34):
Good luck.

Speaker 11 (01:07:36):
I wouldn't do.

Speaker 2 (01:07:36):
It, sure well, And James, I don't want to turn
it around on you overly much because I appreciate the
meta question and the conversation, but I also want to
encourage you to be the call that you want to
see on these shows. If you want to call in
and talk to us about white Christian nationalism. You don't
have to have this meta conversation about why aren't we
talking about white Christian nationalism? Call us and let us

(01:07:59):
talk to you about that question. To anybody who is
watching this show right now, if you have a question
that you feel like, well, why don't they ever talk
about that, it's because you haven't called? And I'd love
for those folks.

Speaker 11 (01:08:12):
And so let me and I'll be I'll be brief,
and you guys, can you know, drop me from there.
But what I want is yours and your other co
host brilliant minds too, through some guidance on how to
combat these these people because they got money and they

(01:08:32):
got power, and they are just running a roughh shot
over American society, over women's rights, over children in schools,
I mean ten commandments in the schools? Really, and so
how do we mobilize you know, because I'm yeah, that's
what I'm looking for.

Speaker 12 (01:08:49):
Is I'm happy to tell you there are great organizations
out there that that that's their whole job is to
coordinate and mobilize people in the fight against this kind
of non sense you're calling into one, right, So, like
the ACA, that's one of the things that they do,
the Freedom from Religion Foundation, that's the type of thing
that they do, right, is trying to and there's plenty

(01:09:11):
more examples of organizations that are out there trying to
fight that good fight. The ACLU is trying to fight
that good fight to make sure that we have a
maintained wall, a barrier between separation, sure between church and states,
to make sure that we don't have these politicians who
I cannot name, going out of their way to force

(01:09:33):
Christianity upon people, or just for example, just as a hypothetical,
putting things like Prager You, which is a self described
conservative Christian organization, which the founder Dennis Prager is on
camera saying, yes, I indoctrinate children. The point is to
bring doctrines to children. Of course, that's what I do.

(01:09:53):
Speaking at NOLA you go Figure Moms for Liberty conference
when he's saying that, right, you can learn more.

Speaker 1 (01:10:00):
About that on my channel if you want.

Speaker 12 (01:10:01):
But like these folks now being put as public school
curriculum to teach that slavery isn't that bad, and to
teach that the founding fathers were actually all super awesome
dudes that never did anything wrong in their entire lives
and to teach that capitalism and Christianity are the only
way to be a good human on the planet. Like
those types of things, those deliberate encroachments and actual indoctrination,

(01:10:26):
those are things in organizations like the Atheist Community of Austin,
Freedom from Religion Foundation, the Americans of Liberties Union, and
many many more actually do work on. So if you
want to help mobilize people, pick up the phone a
volunteer because people need your help. And that's that's the
best advice I can give you for that.

Speaker 11 (01:10:40):
All right, I appreciate you, guys, Thank you, all.

Speaker 2 (01:10:42):
Right, thank you so much for the call. Registered to vote, y'all. Yeah,
it's a scary place, yeah, no question.

Speaker 12 (01:10:48):
I can't tell you who to vote for because we're
a nonprofit, but register to vote.

Speaker 1 (01:10:52):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:10:52):
I hope everybody will because I know they say to like,
think global and act local, and I'm here acting. But
when it comes to those big picture questions like the
last caller was asking, I.

Speaker 1 (01:11:05):
Don't want to think about it anymore. I am tired
of the thinking global part.

Speaker 2 (01:11:09):
I would like to think only about my very small
world as much as possible. Hard and that type of
avoidance is you know, it's part of the problem.

Speaker 9 (01:11:18):
It's all thinking. Keep thinking. That's important.

Speaker 2 (01:11:20):
Sure, and it is so natural because like you, just
you're bombarded every day with horrible news with you know
that these people are losing their rights over here, these
people are being rounded up in the camps over there,
there's a genocide going on over here, there's people being
trampled in the streets over there.

Speaker 10 (01:11:35):
And you're just tired.

Speaker 1 (01:11:37):
And I got to tell you it.

Speaker 12 (01:11:39):
Just if you're out there and you're going through that
as I am, as Christy is, as Scott is, as
everybody is, just as tired as you are about hearing
about it, think about how tired those folks are going
through it, and just try just try to stay there.
And Christy will tell you, and he's right, to take
care of yourself.

Speaker 1 (01:11:57):
And he's right.

Speaker 12 (01:11:57):
And the second thing you get into that, and the
second that you learn how to take care of yourself
and and and do all that stuff and still be
a super productive, call me and tell me how because
I'm crying, y'all whines.

Speaker 1 (01:12:11):
We're open five one two, Please please.

Speaker 12 (01:12:14):
Call me how to be an effective Tell me how
to feel like an effective activist? While also occasionally going
to bed to figure that out.

Speaker 2 (01:12:22):
Okay, well, before we wrap up the show, what do
you say? We talked to Gabe in Texas.

Speaker 1 (01:12:26):
Let's do it? Sounds good, Gabe, you have.

Speaker 2 (01:12:28):
Some questions about discussing vaccine efficacy with a Young Earth creationist.
That is going to make for such a quick baity title.
I'm excited for this conversation if it's so boring.

Speaker 14 (01:12:43):
Correct, I've been at it, Hello Scott, Hello Christy. I've
not had success at all teaching young creationists about evolution
and about vaccine efficacy.

Speaker 1 (01:12:56):
Well, who are these people that you were teaching?

Speaker 2 (01:12:58):
What is the context in you are espousing this, because
that's going to be deeply important to how people take
in information.

Speaker 14 (01:13:05):
Well, to be honest, they're on TikTok. They're the Christians
that are on tektok trying to say that evolution stalls
you know, much like that?

Speaker 3 (01:13:13):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (01:13:13):
Yeah, I mean social media activism will absolutely wear you out.

Speaker 1 (01:13:17):
I'll point that out.

Speaker 2 (01:13:19):
I do appreciate you trying to get good information out there.
Please don't let your self esteem or your personal well
being live and die based on how that goes over
for you.

Speaker 1 (01:13:31):
I mean, believe me, looking.

Speaker 2 (01:13:33):
At the comment section of this show is not always
great for your mental health. But that being said, is
there maybe more specific advice that y'all might offer some
information about how to discuss vaccines in particular.

Speaker 10 (01:13:48):
I've got something I've been talking for a long time,
so I can wait.

Speaker 9 (01:13:50):
I was just gonna say, just just talk to people.
I mean, just just talk to these people, develop a relationship.

Speaker 1 (01:13:56):
Are they are they?

Speaker 9 (01:13:57):
Did we say were there specific people that are that
your family members? Are there people in your community?

Speaker 14 (01:14:02):
I mean what they're just Christians? Christians that have large.

Speaker 9 (01:14:07):
Kind of random strangers information, you know.

Speaker 14 (01:14:11):
Just not necessarily random, but they have a large following.

Speaker 9 (01:14:13):
It can be difficult to hammer facts over people's heads.
I mean, people get the guard goes up, they get resistant,
they don't really listen to you, they don't really consider
what you're saying. And so, you know, one thing that
you can do is just not It doesn't have to
be a well, here's the facts, and if you don't,
you know, if you don't believe them, then you're just
going in the wrong direction. It's a it's a it's

(01:14:34):
a matter of how you present that. If you present
it in such a way that you know, let's explore
this together. Let's examine, let's let's see what we can find.
What do you what information do you have? Let's let's
look at that. Here's some information that I have. Let's
let's go through this together. And if it's if it's
more of a joint effort, uh, then it will feel
less combative and less confrontational. And you know, when when

(01:14:56):
somebody's feeling like they're in a confrontation, the sheild go
up and the you know, the and they tighten up.
And so try to try to communicate in such a
way that it's a collaborative effort, if you know, ask them,
are you interested in in in figuring out how the
world works? Do we want to know what's right here?
Is that what's important? And so let's explore that together.

(01:15:18):
Let's push down that path together. And that can make
a big difference just in the way that you present it.

Speaker 10 (01:15:22):
Yeah, I would parrot the end of that because I
I have gotten a tremendous amount of not just success
in an online discussion, but also just peace of mind
by starting conversations by asking when someone comes to my
comments and says something stupid about vaccine, something stupid about Christie.

Speaker 1 (01:15:37):
I'm about to evolution or whatever.

Speaker 12 (01:15:39):
I've been starting by asking, are you actually asking me
for an explanation about this?

Speaker 1 (01:15:45):
Or are you just here to say some shit? Right?

Speaker 12 (01:15:47):
Like?

Speaker 1 (01:15:47):
What what are we doing? Are you?

Speaker 12 (01:15:48):
Are you actually wanting to have a conversation, because if
you are, I'm happy to tell you why what you
just said is nonsense. But if you're just here to
say some shit, I'm not gonna waste my time. I'm
not gonna waste your time. We can move on from that.
You've said the shit, It's great. And then now when
they're like, Okay, well no, I actually want to say,
now they are in a listening mood instead of a
combative mood. Now they have decided they have told me

(01:16:09):
I am here to listen to you, and now I
can leverage that like, Okay, don't interrupt me, don't cut
me off, let.

Speaker 1 (01:16:13):
Me explain you ask for this?

Speaker 12 (01:16:14):
Yes, And when we get there, I find specifically we're
talking about, you know, vaccine efficacy and vaccine hesitancy. There
are studies, plenty of studies showing that like even the
more Christian somebody is, and especially the kind of white
nationalist Christians we're talking about knows. Those folks have a
very high rate of vaccine hesitancy, very high rate of

(01:16:36):
distrust in medical establishment and doctors, in medical research, in
science in general, and conspiracy theory spreads like crazy. And
the same people who have no idea what might be
in the mountain do they're drinking, and the big mac
they're eating, and the cigarettes they're smoking and the other
medications that keep them alive every day will tell you
that they don't know what's in that vaccine, so they

(01:16:57):
just can't trust it. And so to do is to
try to just relate it to other things that are
a little bit less scary, a little bit more mundane.
Here's an example. Seat belts are only about maybe fifty
to sixty percent effective on a good day, sixty percent,
So you have about a fifty percent chance of a
seat belt really reducing the risk of serious injury or

(01:17:19):
death in a car accident. Air bags you're talking like
thirty five to forty percent mete right, So seat belts
and air bags, which we all agree are probably good
things to use when you are driving, are much less
effective than a vaccine, where you have like you know,
MMR vaccine is something like what like ninety five percent
immunity if you have and so like, you have these

(01:17:40):
vaccines that are remarkably effective, and the same people who
are going to tell you, well, it's not one hundred
percent effecive, So I don't trust it.

Speaker 1 (01:17:46):
Guarantee you have an air bag in your car, and you're.

Speaker 12 (01:17:48):
Not going to cut that shit out because it's only
thirty five percent effective. Now, imagine car crashes are contagious.

Speaker 1 (01:17:54):
What do you want in your car?

Speaker 12 (01:17:56):
You want the thing that's going to save your life,
even if it's not a guarantee.

Speaker 1 (01:18:00):
You want that little bit of help.

Speaker 12 (01:18:02):
And so if you can start to think about it
that way, now you can think about, Okay, this thing.
It's not one hundred percent effective. It doesn't prevent me
from always catching the disease. It doesn't prevent me from
always spreading the disease, but it makes it much less
likely that I catch it, and it makes it way
less likely that I get severely sick or die from it,
and I can spread this to my friends and my

(01:18:22):
loved ones. I don't want my grandma dealing with this either,
So I'm going to make sure that I'm protected, to
make sure that she's protected. Just like if a car
crash was contagious, if I put my grandma in the car,
I'm going to make damn sure she has a seat
belt in an airbag. I'm not going to drive with her,
you know, without those things, because I care about her life.
So I'm going to make sure that I'm protected by
getting a car that has these safety features and that

(01:18:44):
protects my passenger as well the people that I love.
That's the way that I would try to reach out
to people this way, And I'm telling you it's going
to be hard, and it's probably still not gonna work
because those everlast thing thoughts softwares are going to jump
in and people are going to say what they want
to say, what they've been taught to say, but whatever
their favorite podcast told them to say. But the end
of the day, that's the best way that I can
try to bridge that gap with people, like.

Speaker 9 (01:19:03):
So, can we get our hands on that vaccination for
those car crashes?

Speaker 1 (01:19:07):
Yes? Absolutely?

Speaker 9 (01:19:08):
Okay, all right, that's a relief.

Speaker 1 (01:19:10):
How's that strike you, cabe.

Speaker 14 (01:19:13):
One of the things I been trying to do to
encourage better conversations is to well, I guess the question,
how do you get them to call, for example, talk
to events, because I've only been successful in my entire
life for one persons actually call.

Speaker 1 (01:19:28):
Same thing I said earlier.

Speaker 12 (01:19:29):
If you find out, tell me what good the amount
of people in every one of my comment sections telling
me that they can call in and destroy me in
a debate versus the amount of people that actually call
and try massive disparity.

Speaker 1 (01:19:40):
So you let me know when you find out.

Speaker 2 (01:19:42):
I appreciate you putting yourself out there and trying to
put good information out there as well.

Speaker 14 (01:19:47):
Okay, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Speaker 1 (01:19:49):
Thank you all right, Sunday, thank you so much.

Speaker 2 (01:19:52):
All right, Well, it feels like we are wrapping up
so much faster than I wanted to. This was a
good time. Like I said, we really do look forward
to this all year. I mean, three hundred and sixty
four more days until start the countdown again. Before we
head out, though, I do want to make sure to
thank our top five patrons. Of course, at the top

(01:20:14):
again we have Oops All Singularity, Dingleberry, Jackson, Colevi, Helvetti,
Ja Carlton, and in the fifth spot Muldron d Malcontent,
who I haven't gotten to say that one yet.

Speaker 1 (01:20:26):
That's fun. I'll be wrapping my tongue around that for
a while.

Speaker 2 (01:20:30):
Our honorable mention this week in the sixth spot is
Bethany P.

Speaker 1 (01:20:34):
Thank you Harder, Bethany.

Speaker 2 (01:20:37):
Thank you to everyone who gives to us on Patreon.
If you want to hear your name red, you can
help us out at tiny dot c c slash, Patreon
t H. Of course, I want to remind people about
the question of the week.

Speaker 1 (01:20:52):
What do you guys say? What shouldn't you see in
the atheist community.

Speaker 9 (01:20:57):
What we shouldn't see is bad arguments against religion. There's
plenty of good arguments. Don't use the bad ones.

Speaker 2 (01:21:03):
Don't use the bad ones. Okay, fair, so more of
a prescriptive shouldn't it? Got Yeah, I want to say
something Quippi.

Speaker 12 (01:21:10):
But honestly, the thing that frustrates me the most is
when people in atheist communities are like, they call religion
a mental illness or something like that.

Speaker 1 (01:21:16):
Yeah, and so unbelievably counterproductivity is.

Speaker 9 (01:21:19):
One of the bad ones.

Speaker 1 (01:21:20):
Yeah, that's one of the bad ones.

Speaker 12 (01:21:21):
That just don't do that, especially if you were once
religious and deconstructive.

Speaker 1 (01:21:27):
Don't be a dick to your past self. Come on,
all right, well, good advice.

Speaker 2 (01:21:32):
Uh, We've got a loaded atheists experience coming up later today.
If you are watching this show live, I again want
to say thank you to my cast earlier today with
Doctor Ben and Sophia, and I want to say thank
you to our incredible crew. But most importantly, I am
definitely sending out love rings to our live studio audience,

(01:21:56):
everybody who traveled to be part of this incredible weekend.

Speaker 1 (01:22:00):
Everybody did the work. Anybody all want to send out
some lover rings too? Before we step out for today.

Speaker 9 (01:22:06):
I would like to send love rings out to my
wonderful wife who was back in Minnesota who didn't come
with me this year.

Speaker 1 (01:22:11):
Oh.

Speaker 12 (01:22:12):
I also have a lovely wife in Oklahoma. And also
just squids in general. I want squeeze out squids.

Speaker 1 (01:22:17):
Let's send out some squids. All wids out there everywhere.
Great day today. I love you all.

Speaker 3 (01:22:25):
Well.

Speaker 2 (01:22:25):
With that, I will remind everybody that if you don't believe,
this is your community and we appreciate you being here,
and if you do believe, sincerely truly, I absolutely mean
this from the bottom of my heart.

Speaker 1 (01:22:38):
We don't hate you, We're just not convinced. H We

(01:23:01):
want the truth. So watch Truth Wanted live Fridays at
seven p m. Central Call five one two nine nine
one nine two four two, or visit tiny dot cc
forward slash call tw