1. Skepdog says

    You guys claim to want to encourage free discussion, but then you inhibit free discussion by disabling comments in Youtube and forcing this shitty freethought blog.
    It’s ridiculous, and proof that atheists can be just as controlling as any theist!
    Why do you continue to manipulate us out of a truly ‘free’ discussion?!
    The ‘Freethought blog’ sucks ASS!!

  2. Monocle Smile says

    You managed to post here just fine. There are also several facebook discussion groups. Laziness isn’t an argument. Troll harder.

  3. grasshoppermouse says

    That first caller was such an obvious troll. First he claims to be an atheist who tries to avoid anything Christian, then he says he was in a church for some reason, and God spoke to him, and apparently spoke to him in ICP lyrics. Then he suddenly seems to not understand why anyone would be atheist, and that he thinks mass killers are all atheists and muslims, which would be a very strange way to think for someone who was once atheist themselves.

  4. Stuart says

    This is hilarious watching Jen becoming increasingly bored and fed up with these pseudo intelligent ideas of things beyond reality.

  5. Edward from londom says

    hi Jen and John

    God has allowed a Satanic system temporarily so that the issue of God’s sovereignty can be resolved.

    Morality is subjective, and Satan has attacked God.

    This system allows Satan an opportunity to rule over mankind. The new system will be ruled by God.

    I hope that answers your question.

    I will phone in again to help you both learn the truth, but if not then you will learn the truth later.

  6. Mobius says

    The first several callers were painful to listen to, bordering on incoherence. Or perhaps past it. Vigh saved the show IMHO, with some good questions and dialog. Kera’s call was also good, though sad. It bothers me that religion can tear families apart in that way. Hope she manages to salvage some of her family relations. I think you guys gave her some good advice, but it is still going to be difficult.

  7. Ed says

    Jesus. I couldn’t even get through the whole show. Were all the callers drooling on themselves?

  8. Ben Weaver says

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA Edward.That must’ve been quite a big doobie.Time to up the dose on them pills.

  9. says

    1st things 1st: I identify as a Skeptic, Humanist, and Agnostic-Atheist.
    Zack sounded like Terrence McKenna’s parrot. Almost word for word. Anyway, although I didn’t agree with all the ideas that McKenna (and therefore by proxy Zack) propagated the man was a freakin’ genius and absolutely a joy to listen to. If you haven’t had the pleasure, I highly recommend it.
    I have noticed an almost anti-psychedelic trend on The Atheist Experience and I think this is sad to see. I dont like how this profound experience gets dismissed with arrogance every time its been brought up over the years. It doesnt help that those that have called in have represented psychedelics poorly, sometimes bridging on irrationality. Zack went wrong by trying to hit on every Mckenna buzzword he could (Whitehead, Plato, accepting the big bang as the limit case for credulity etc..). He cant expect them to get all that in 5 min!
    If anyone from the show ends up reading this, please do yourself a favor and look into the numerous studies done on DMT and Psilocybin. Better yet, responsibly ingest 4-5 grams of psilocybin and the awe of how little we know as a species will become obvious. It has strengthened my humanism and skepticism in ways I would have touched without these plants.
    We cant seek, let alone find truth on our own

    All the best and thank you all so much for what you do,


  10. paxoll says

    Sigh, AGAIN abiogenesis is NOT a scientific theory. It has not been demonstrated as possible in the lab, as that would require actually demonstrating every single step. Please, I know very few people on this show have advanced degrees in science but you have made correct statements in this show. Abiogenesis is a natural explanation for how life began, multiple hypotheses for this process have been put forward and there are multiple experiments that support each of these hypotheses. As of yet, no hypothesis has been completely demonstrated to be possible. Stop overstating this. Yes the callers you are talking to are mostly not informed enough to know that you are overstating the evidence, but it is very off putting to anyone who DOES know. It may not be intentional but it is a very dishonest argument.

  11. Monocle Smile says

    That assessment is mostly correct.
    However, it’s not really worth getting that upset over. It’s not the year 1800. As someone who does understand that no single abiogenesis hypothesis has been “completely demonstrated,” I don’t find it off-putting at all to throw the current evidence in the face of creationist fools.

  12. Monocle Smile says

    You’re not fooling anyone.


    Better yet, responsibly ingest 4-5 grams of psilocybin and the awe of how little we know as a species will become obvious

    I remain unimpressed. Your brain goes wild. What does this really tell us aside from the fact that chemicals can screw with our brains?

    I have noticed an almost anti-psychedelic trend on The Atheist Experience and I think this is sad to see. I dont like how this profound experience gets dismissed with arrogance every time its been brought up over the years. It doesnt help that those that have called in have represented psychedelics poorly, sometimes bridging on irrationality

    Sounds cultish.

  13. RationalismRules says

    @Edward from London (londom?)
    My only question for you is why do you call the show / post comments under multiple names? Does your JW bible not have the bit about “bearing false witness”?

  14. RationalismRules says

    Anyone else unable to post to episode 21.41? I’m wondering if posting has been closed off, or whether I’ve been blocked from that thread for ripping Murat a new one.

  15. sayamything says

    God is an ICP fan. This actually makes sense.

    Even if abiogenesis actually is “just a theory” in the colloquial sense, it would still serve as an answer to Edward’s dichotomy. At least, some of the “theories” based on said experiments. It offers a path beyond chance and intelligent design as options. Even if it’s “just a theory,” it answers his question.

  16. says

    zack & jen @ 50:20:

    zack: like i hear things that contradict all the time. sometimes in science they’ll come out with “you need to eat more zinc”, and then the other day it’s like, oh, “you need to exercise more”, things of that nature …

    jen: that sounds like some kind of alt-med crap that gets bandied around all the time. i don’t think that there’s actual science based behind most of that.

    i wish jen had pushed back harder against this point. yes, alt-med circles are awash in faddish pseudoscientific quackery, but, while it’s rare to find complete reversals, conventional scientists in every legitimate field update their findings all the time, as new evidence comes in. it’s a feature of real science, not a bug.

    i hear this a lot from friends and family. remember the “is pluto a planet?” noncontroversy? the point is to drag the findings of professional scientists down to the level of their preferred folklores and uninformed speculations, so they can rationalize believing whatever they feel like believing. because those so-called “scientists” can’t make up their minds about anything and ultimately everybody’s just guessing …

  17. Subduction Zone says

    I can understand how some would conflate Jen with Tracy. Both are female and lesbian and if one isolates oneself from gay and lesbian people they may all seem to be “the same” much in the same way that a person that avoids persons of other races will think that all African Americans are “the same”. Exposure to people outside of your own little group increases understanding of that group. And just as gay people have learned that being in the closet does no good for themselves atheists are now learning that being closeted does not do them any good.

  18. gaspar says

    New age irrational thinking is officially flooding The Atheist Experience calls. This is the “price” the show has to pay by taking the show on line. Religions may now and then affect US politics, but irrational new age bs is affecting our everyday life outside the US and all around the world. I think its time to expand the subject of the show.
    It will explode the the viewers and the conversation about Reason and Logic.

  19. CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain says

    @Subduction Zone #22:

    some would conflate Jen with Tracy. Both are female and lesbian

    It’s Tracie, and IIRC she’s mentioned a husband. *clickety-click* She brought a husband to Matt & Beth’s wedding, a few years ago. She hardly mentions such things because it’s not relevant to the show.

  20. RationalismRules says

    Do any of the studies that you want us to track down test for correspondence between true claims and psychedelic use? Because that’s what AXP’ers tend to care about – not whether or not you had a ‘mystical experience’ that led you to wondrous deep insights about the cosmos, but whether or not those insights are actually true.

    It’s not the apple hitting Newton on the head that’s significant, it’s the theory of gravity that he came up with. If Newton called AXP to tell us “you really should hang out under apple trees more – it will help you to understand the universe” he would get the same reception as psilo-evangelists get.

  21. Rustodian says

    Please can you keep Edward off the show? He has proven himself to be of no value to the conversation, beyond the first couple of times he’s called over the years, talking about so called ‘fulfilled prophecies’, and ‘energy turning into the physical’ (whatever the hell that menas).

  22. CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain says

    The horse anecdote was obscure. I only found two blogs talking about that, both citing a biography.
    The Winds of God The Story of the Early Pentecostal Days (1901-1914) in the Life of Howard A. Goss (1958)
    Paraphrasing the blogs…
    Travelling faith healer, Howard Goss was converted to Charles Parham’s new “Apostolic Faith” in high school. After high school in a mining job, he tripped and spooked a horse, which kicked his face. As he lost consciousness, he heard a voice say, “This is your last chance,” and later he left Kansas for Parham’s Bible School in Texas to become a minister.
    Article: Wikipedia – Charles Fox Parham (1873-1929)

    Together with William J. Seymour, Parham was one of the two central figures in the development and early spread of American Pentecostalism. It was Parham who associated glossolalia with the baptism in the Holy Spirit


    Parham repeatedly denied being a practicing homosexual, but coverage was picked up by the press. […] In addition there were allegations of financial irregularity and of doctrinal aberrations.
    In the aftermath of these events his large support base in {Illinois} descended into a Salem-like frenzy of insanity, eventually killing three of their members in brutal exorcisms. […] His attacks on emerging leaders coupled with the allegations alienated him from much of the movement that he began. He became “an embarrassment” to a new movement which was trying to establish its credibility.

    In a move criticized by Parham, his Apostolic Faith Movement merged with other Pentecostal groups in 1914 to form the [Assemblies of God]”.

    Article: Wikipedia – Howard A. Goss (1883-1964)

    a pastor who was an original member of the Assemblies of God […] the first superintendent of the United Pentecostal Churches.
    By 1907, Goss and the majority of the Apostolic Faith Movement broke with Parham. […] they began to refer to themselves as “Pentecostals” instead of “Apostolic Faith Group” in order to disaffiliate with controversial scandals associated with Parham.

  23. John Iacoletti says

    I know nothing about Insane Clown Posse. If it was a They Might Be Giants lyric, I would have caught it. 🙂

  24. John Iacoletti says

    paxroll, are you saying that Miller-Urey did not show that it’s possible — given the right input conditions — for organic compounds to be chemically synthesized from inorganic compounds?

  25. Edward from london says

    Milley-Urey made an amino acid that is not used in life. (3D protein printers)

    Amino acids are not 3D protein printers.

  26. Jessica O says

    This is the first time i could not manage to sit through a full episode. Between dim witted people, bad phone connections and microphone isdues in the audience i just got extremely frustrated near the start and began skipping through the recording only to find i had stopped at another dim wit.

    Kudos to all of the hosts and cohosts who can find it within themselves to remain calm and cool each week while you hammer away at what are essentially the same BS calls from various nut jobs. You have considerably more patience than I do. Looking forward to next weeks show.

  27. John Iacoletti says

    Miller himself identified 5 amino acids. Since then, reanalyses have identified a further 25 amino acids. And what’s a “3D protein printer”?

  28. Monocle Smile says

    Monday Morning AXP.
    Alex was a time-wasting troll.
    Edward was also a waste of time, but unfortunately he’s real.
    Greg and Zack were woo monkeys. Cicero had it right about philosophers. Jen’s expressions were priceless.
    This Whitehead dude sounds loony. “Why do things go through the formality of occurring?” That’s not even a coherent question, and staring into one’s navel is not how one would answer it anyway. And now, we have the predictable attack on science for not accepting nutty bafflegab. Zack’s blather makes my brain bleed and the bit about India was astoundingly ignorant.
    Great. Jung. Bad psychology. Fan-fucking-tastic. “Where do new ideas come from?” “What is the brain?” The “shamanic model?” Get professional help, Zack.

    Domenic, after listening to those calls, it’s pretty embarrassing to try to defend this psychedelic crap.

  29. Edward from london says

    Only 20 left handed amino acids are used to make living cells. Living cells are 3D protein printers. Humans can make 3D printers that use metal or plastic. God has made 3D printers out of amino acids.

    Animals are robots. Some of these robots have pre programmed subjective morality that can be reprogrammed by humans.

    Humans are made out of the same 3D protein printers as the animals but are not animals. This is why you guys misunderstand subjective morality.

    We are allowed to eat animals, but humans are not animals because we are created in God’s image.
    Humans were designed to live forever on paradise Earth, animals were not.

    Christendom is about to be destroyed by God via the corrupt UN..

    Adam and Eve were created as atheists, and were so for a few seconds, until God communicated with them.
    It was lovely to speak to you John. I am sorry that humans have been brainwashed by this system, but you will learn the truth, and you will worship Jehovah God forever on paradise Earth.

    Also .. all of your dead loved ones will be recreated out of physical matter as themselves, and you will meet all of your great great grandparents.

  30. Woody says

    Let me sum this up for Edward:

    “Assertion [no evidence].
    Assertion [no evidence].
    Assertion [no evidence].
    But it’s ok because I feel sorry for you when the baddie comes and sticks it in your neck.”

    I think that about covered it.

  31. Robert, not Bob says

    I was interested to hear of another domination founded by a leader with traumatic brain damage. The Seventh-Day Adventists’ founder, Ellen White, was hit in the head by a rock as a child. Adventists do NOT like answering objections to White’s visions, for some reason…

    Now I’m sure a lot of prophetic visions are made up or legend, but I’ve always wondered how many are “genuine” nightmares or hallucinations.

  32. says

    As others have pointed out, the first caller was just trying to troll you with ICP lyrics. Unfortunately, most of the people in Alabama aren’t much brighter than that caller was. I wish I could assure everyone that the stereotypes only apply to a small portion of the population, however, that’s just not the case. Finding someone around here who is capable of holding a conversation that is more intelligent than “Then why do we still have monkeys?” is extremely rare.

  33. paxoll says

    @John Thank you for seeing my post. Let me begin with a personal example from back when I took organic chemistry. Organic chemistry is learning how atoms bond to form compounds, and how those bonds are shaped and influence chemical reactions. The reactions all have names like, S1, S2, E1, E2. Given two compounds and knowing what reaction is happening you can tell what your final compounds will be. Now I get toward the end of the semester and I have this ah-ha moment and I ask my teacher, don’t they all happen at the same time? The answer is Yes. Thus even my dumbass can hit upon this basic chemistry idea. Given any imput of energy into a chemical reaction, you will get every possible reaction to the degree of probability based on energy levels of those reactions. Thus the Urey-Miller experiment was not an experiment to see IF organic compounds could be created, but what kinds and in what levels of concentrations. Because when anything can happen, its easier to simply see what happens then try to calculate what will happen. Thus the experiment demonstrated that yes you can create an amino acid, or a nucleic acid, but you also formed thousands of other chemicals that have no relationship to life processes.

    Abiogensis as I pointed out in a previous thread is a series of processes that start with basic elements and ends with a “living” system. It it is like putting a puzzle together where you have two corners but cannot even know you have a picture until you can connect those two corners with a series of pieces. The Urey-Miller experiment is one corner. The results of which presents a very large obstacle for every other step that has been hypothesized because those other chemicals formed are going to be a roadblock for that proposed mechanism. For instance the protein hypothesis is that dehydration reactions in tide pools can create significantly long chains of amino acids to develop a 3 dimensional shape that can have enzymatic (catalytic) specific properties. Well those experiments did not contain all the junk chemicals which could terminate the chain of amino acids. The experiment’s ability to provide support for abiogenesis is akin to picking up a random puzzle piece and saying, well it’s the same size as the other two pieces so it must belong to the same puzzle, while it isn’t actually connected to anything. This is equally true for geothermal poly lipid membranes, concentration of chemicals across poly lipid membranes and every other hypothesis involved with abiogenesis.

    When Jen used the term Theory after talking about abiogenesis she was COMPLETELY in the wrong. There is only unproven hypothesis at this point (granted the last time I looked into these experiments in depth was about 3 years ago). I am a firm believer that abiogenesis happened, but based on the fact that we have a natural explanation for everything we have discovered and a supernatural explanation for nothing.

  34. Frodo says

    Wow, some of the calls were objectively painful to listen to.

    Where is that one high school kid that calls in with a variety of different names and a script of questions and arguments? At least that was interesting to listen to.

  35. CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain says

    @Myself #27:
    Doh, edit fail. I didn’t adjust everything after inverting a sentence.
    Travelling faith healer, Howard Goss was converted to Charles Parham’s new “Apostolic Faith”
    should read
    Howard Goss was converted to travelling faith healer Charles Parham’s new “Apostolic Faith”

  36. Edward from london says

    We are living on a wet rock spaceship with an external heat supply.

    We have limited time to work it all out.

    All of humanity will be brought back to life from the common grave ( Hell, old english) whereby we are non existent. And then humans will be taught the truth so that they can make an informed decision as to whether they want to obey Jehovah God or not.

    I hope that that makes sense to everyone.

  37. Cyclone Dusk says

    Man, *all* these calls have made me cringe so far. I’m close to the end of the Zack Attack (I hope!) and holy crap is he having a HARD time just PHRASING what he’s trying to get across. I appreciate the amount of patience you showed him, and I can understand when sometimes it can be kind of a lost cause to plead for someone to explain something better when, clearly, they are unable to generate the words needed to do so… but all the same,

    I sadly kept getting this impression from you that you weren’t even actually trying to listen in the first place. That is to say, instead of listening, you were waiting for your turn to speak, and rather than attempting to comprehend, you were instead ‘scanning’ for opportunities to object and reject.

    … I apologize if that sounded mean. Like Zack, I’m not the best communicator in the world. I want to rephrase just in case it might come across more amicably: You guys are used to being harangued from all sides by very confused and troubled people and I daresay I’d be awfully defensive under conditions like those, and I’d be expecting just about everybody to try shoveling snake oil and pixie dust down my throat. I humbly request that you take but a moment to remind yourself that not everybody has an ulterior motive or an axe to grind. I think Zack was attempting to engage you in “good faith” and it did not seem as though he was treated as such. Even if his ideas are, by definition, “out there”.

    But that said, I would like to speak to that out-there-ness:

    It’s a trivial fact that, as an example, the range of frequencies that our ears can pick up as vibrations in the atmosphere does not cover a particularly wide range, and it decreases with age due to wear and tear in the physical structures of the ear. Likewise, the sliver of the electromagnetic spectrum that our eyes are capable of registering is vanishingly infinitessimal. And it isn’t JUST mechanical limitations that constrain our perceptions – but more than that, the mind VERY OFTEN tunes out sensory as though it is patternless ‘noise’, glossing over details that don’t subjectively SEEM relevant.

    Now, certainly we’ve augmented our ability to perceive beyond the mechanical ranges using machines – ultra low (and high) frequency microphones, telescopes that image infrared, ultraviolet, and radio waves…

    This gives us a wider breadth of content to select from… but PSYCHOLOGICALLY we still have the same SYSTEM actually *making* the selections. And what psychadelics and other brain-chemistry-modifying substances CAN do is adjust our pattern recognition and allow us to find patterns that are harder to locate.

    OR, UNFORTUNATELY, lead us to PERCEIVE patterns where there aren’t any! Yes, that IS a danger, but when *hasn’t* it been a risk, to look again where we haven’t seen anything prior, that it isn’t a waste of time or that we’d get a false positive? If we conducted the hubble deep field and got nothing but black, well darn that would be a shame, but it would not have reduced the value of the ATTEMPT!

    In other words… I propose that psychadelics can be useful for SHIFTING THE WINDOW of our attention into areas that we otherwise ignore, just in case we missed something. And even if we perceive nothing new, or even if we perceive false positives, it’s still worth GATHERING that information in the first place such that it can be compared against our present models.

    I think, in summation, that Zack was trying to tell us that there might actually be a babies in all the bathwater we throw out on a regular basis, and it would behoove us to invest just a little bit more effort in looking, and looking in *ways* that we are perhaps unused to.

  38. Monocle Smile says

    No. That doesn’t make sense. None of your barely readable bullshit has ever made sense to anyone because it’s all blithering nonsense by design.
    Can this cretin be banned? The repetitive posts could qualify as spam.

  39. John Iacoletti says

    I didn’t say Miller-Urey proves abiogenesis, but it shows that organic compounds can result from inorganic compounds, a heat source, and a spark. And organic compounds are the building blocks of life. Saying that other chemicals are also produced is irrelevant. Saying that these other chemicals will necessarily be a roadblock is something that must be demonstrated.

  40. Mary P. Wakulik says

    I really wish you would cut off the bizarre supposed science lectures and “deepities”. Echoing previous sentiments, this was painful.

  41. John Iacoletti says

    Edward, you will only be allowed to continue making unsubstantiated assertions for so long. Where is your evidence for any of this?

  42. Monocle Smile says

    paxoll actually has a point…it’s still a long way from “organic compounds” to “simple, self-replicating molecular systems.” Lots and lots of those steps have been demonstrated (including the later stages), but he’s right…there’s no comprehensive demonstration all the way through. However, the overall point is still salient; it’s really only a matter of time until we fill in enough gaps to say ‘this is likely how life developed from simple compounds.”

  43. paxoll says

    @Edward, this guy is not a scientist and is not applying science and probability correctly. First when dealing with any early life the smallest and simplest structures will be made first, we have enzymatically active proteins that are around 50 amino acids long and simple experiments can form proteins that long
    Probability is only calculable if you know all the variables, which this guy makes completely fallacious assumptions for. For a well shuffled deck of cards the chance of dealing all 13 cards of the same suit is exactly the same probability of any other hand of 13 cards and if one hand was dealt every second it would take 20 thousand years for any hand to reach the probability equal to 1, but you could deal that hand in the very first second. I suggest you go to school and learn some real science instead of relying on apologetic frauds to get your information about science.

  44. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    I love the card-dealing analogy, personally, because it shows how little that they understand proper statistics.

    Consider this scenario: Suppose you went to Las Vegas, and played standard 5 card poker for 8 hours a day, for 7 days. Suppose that you, while playing poker, also recorded all of the hands that you were, and kept track of the order that you were dealt them. Suppose that you tried to calculate a naive probability of this sort for the question: What are the odds that you were dealt those hands in that order? The answer is: practically zero. Extremely rare things happen all the time. The proper use of statistics to answers questions of the sort “how likely is it that this happened?” is a lot more complicated than this silly and naive sort of calculating probabilities.

    Offhand, I’m tempted to conclude that the proper way to apply statistics is to apply proper Bayesian reasoning with the proper reference classes.

    The odds that I could guess the poker hands that you were dealt in that week is about 0. If someone presents to me a list of hands for that week, I would judge the likeliness that it is accurate to be about 0, unless and except I had additional evidence that the list of hands was a result of an observer who accurately wrote down the hands. Because of that additional evidence, my estimate for the likeliness of the correctness of the list of hands would be much higher.

  45. CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain says

    @John Iacoletti #46:

    Edward, you will only be allowed to continue making unsubstantiated assertions for so long.

    What Edward said on the show

    (27:15): We all agree that energy can slow down into physical and become aware of itself temporarily in the form of a human.
    (28:56): It’s deliberately difficult to allow a satanic system, which is a human rulership via the gun, the illusion of commerce, and religion including christendom – which is designed to deceive humanity.

    See: past comments by PeterFromLondonUK
    Thread: Axp – 20.12

    Energy creatures (Angels, of which some rebelled and became demons, although we are made up from physical which is slowed down energy) have been alive for a long time and saw what happened in the past, and are witnesses to what is written in the Bible.
    The main issue here is to build up a case against Satan so that he can be killed legally.
    Lots of proof will come later and the fact that most of humanity do not and have not known the truth is a temporary situation. Even the dead will learn the truth once they are brought back to life on Earth.
    This system (human governance, commerce (illusion) and false religion (including Christendom)) has been set up so that Satan can rule over humanity.

    Thread: Axp – 20.20
    Thread: Axp – 20.21

  46. CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain says

    @John Iacoletti #46 cotd:
    See also: JohnFromLONDONuk
    Thread: Axp – 947

    You have to prove that life can come from non living matter by chance. And also that energy can turn into physical by chance.

    Also 946, 948, and 949.
    Monocle Smile on Axp 949, #54

    I’m not exactly ban-happy, but I’d be okay with saying goodbye to John from London.

  47. paxoll says

    @John, Yes you correctly stated HERE that the Urey Miller experiment showed you can create organic molecules, but the topic is abiogenesis, what has one to do with the other? Calling an amino acid or nucleic acid a “building block” of life is like picking up a random pebble and saying this is the building block of concrete thus skyscrapers are possible. “Saying that other chemicals are also produced is irrelevant.” is really beyond stupid since abiogenisis is a process and every step has to link with the next for it to be demonstrated to be a possibility. Which is why I explicitly stated exactly why it is relevant, and saying “will necessarily be a roadblock is something that must be demonstrated.” is really showing your complete ignorance on this topic. This is why when you buy chemicals for chemistry experiments you buy a very pure substance, why the smallest contaminates in an experiment can make the whole thing fail. Why most of the experiments for creating organic polymers use specific activated monomers instead of more common simple monomers, this is specifically used for DNA sequencing to stop DNA replication. When you are trying to show scientific possibility of a natural occurrence, you have to actually do demonstrate it. You have to connect the first and last puzzle pieces before you can begin to claim you have a complete puzzle.

  48. paxoll says

    @Edward you are incapable of organized thought or are simply a troll. you speak english and can in theory understand what people on the show and in this forum are telling you. If you are unable to respond appropriately in order to have a rational dialog, you are going to be banned, and everyone here will be on the look out every time you make a new account and have you banned again.

  49. John Iacoletti says

    paxroll – when did I ever claim to have a complete puzzle? When did I ever claim that “every step” of what is an unknown process has been demonstrated? Life (as we know it) requires organic compounds. It’s been shown that organic compounds can result from inorganic compounds, heat, and spark. That’s all I’m saying.

  50. paxoll says

    @John, in the show you said we didn’t know, but Jen also went on and on about abiogenesis being a scientific theory, which in scientific terms IS having the full outline connecting the beginning with the end point. This is what I’ve been saying repeatedly, abiogenesis is NOT a scientific theory. That was what I’ve been pointing out in EVERY post I’ve made.

  51. RationalismRules says

    Adam and Eve were created as atheists, and were so for a few seconds, until God communicated with them.

    Not satisfied with the immutable Word of a perfect God, JohnEdward began to rewrite the Big Book of Fairytales with additional content that he pulled out of his butt…

  52. Edward from london says

    @60. Adam and Eve could only know about God if God communicated with them. I am not making anything up, rather i am declaring the truth to you.

  53. Edward from london says

    I am always cut off when i call the show. Truth can look after itself.

    Your knowing the truth is not the most important issue. God’s sovereignty is the most important issue.

    You will all learn the truth later.

  54. RationalismRules says


    Adam and Eve could only know about God if God communicated with them. I am not making anything up, rather i am declaring the truth to you.

    So the ‘truth’ that you are declaring is that God lacked the power to instill knowledge of Himself in their minds when he created them? Where exactly did you get this ‘truth’ from, if not out of your butt?

  55. jeffh123 says

    Thank you Jen. These… people come up with all sorts of things God has done, but there isn’t anything in the Bible describing these things. The Bible doesn’t mention genetics. In fact, we should all be horribly inbred monsters if the Bible is true. Jen, how do you keep your patience? I could see the growing irritation in you as the calls progressed.

  56. says

    cyclone dust @ 43:

    And even if we perceive nothing new, or even if we perceive false positives, it’s still worth GATHERING that information in the first place such that it can be compared against our present models.

    three principles of the scientific method are demonstrability, reproducibility, reliability. from my own experience with psychedelics, i don’t know how i could actually demonstrate or reproduce, or describe reliably or meaningfully anything i’ve ever perceived or thought during those episodes. nor can i say with any confidence that i’ve ever grasped an accurate and meaningful description of someone’s else’s experiences. they’re entirely subjective.

    trying to get a useful description of a psychedelic experience is like trying to get a useful definition of the words “spiritual” or “soul”. everybody’s gonna tell you something different, and usually something not particularly coherent.

  57. RationalismRules says

    You’ve gone awfully quiet on the ‘Adam & Eve were converted atheists’ claim.

    Which is it? Does God lack power, or do you lack truth?

  58. Edward from london says

    @69. God could of pre-programmed Adam and Eve with knowledge of Him but did not. Hence they were created as not knowing which is like all humans.

    Humans can only learn about God via communication from God. It was direct speaking to some humans but most it is thru the Bible.

  59. RationalismRules says


    God could of pre-programmed Adam and Eve with knowledge of Him but did not. Hence they were created as not knowing which is like all humans.

    Same question as before: where are you getting this from, if not out of your butt?

  60. Jason Street says

    Please, as a member of the United Kingdom I have to apologise on behalf of Edward. It’s obvious that when it was time for his biology class instead he decided it would be more constructive to put his fingers in his ears and dream of Jesus!
    We have an excellent school curriculum here in the UK and although not perfect, the basics of evolution are taught leaving Edward with no excuse!

  61. Nathan says

    Zack made no sense, I do testing on carbon fiber for a living, I don’t throw out outliars in my data unless I have a good reason too, I have to investigate them all. He has no idea how the scientific method works.

  62. Bill Bo says

    Edward, clearly our universe has the processes to generate life from inanimate matter. Even more amazing, it has the processes to create intelligence from inanimate matter. NO ONE knows how/why the universe has this capability (yet). You seem to want people to acknowledge that your god is responsible for it. To do that you need to show 1. your god exists, 2. that it is actually responsible. Spouting JW propaganda accomplishes neither. If you don’t actually know something, the only honest answer is “I don’t know”. Else you are a liar or a fool.

  63. Edward from london says

    76. Beliefs count for nothing. We are the only true religion. We are going to declare the truth whether people like it or not.

  64. Edward from london says

    78. You do actually have a good point. Satan knows the truth and God is going to kill him.

  65. moldred says

    The English guy was partly right. Watching the science channel, I have a rudimentary understanding of how most of what makes up matter is nothing (empty spaces), and most of the rest is energy. Matter consists of atoms. Atoms have a nucleus of protons and neutrons made of sub-atomic particles that are types of persistent energy and Higgs bosons in a Higg Field of energy. If that nucleus were the size of a baseball the electrons that sort of orbit by popping into and out of existence in different locations would range from 10 football fields to many miles away with nothing in between, So basically everything is mostly nothing…

  66. moldred says

    Drugs are the map not the territory. There were controlled experiment in the 1960’s by doctors and the government . Ken Kesey was a volunteer for hospital experiments and George H. W. Bush for the CIA. At the present time there are doctors using psychedelics with terminal patients and having some positive results.
    Terence Kemp McKenna (November 16, 1946 – April 3, 2000) was an American ethnobotanist, mystic, psychonaut, lecturer, author, and an advocate for the responsible use of naturally occurring psychedelic plants. He spoke and wrote about a variety of subjects, including psychedelic drugs, plant-based entheogens, shamanism, metaphysics, alchemy, language, philosophy, culture, technology, environmentalism, and the theoretical origins of human consciousness. He was called the “Timothy Leary of the ’90s”, “one of the leading authorities on the ontological foundations of shamanism”, and the “intellectual voice of rave culture”.McKenna formulated a concept about the nature of time based on fractal patterns he claimed to have discovered in the I Ching, which he called novelty theory, proposing this predicted the end of time in the year 2012. His promotion of novelty theory and its connection to the Maya calendar is credited as one of the factors leading to the widespread beliefs about 2012 eschatology.[9] Novelty theory is considered pseudoscience.
    He put forth the idea that mushrooms are the source of religion. Shamans testing the edibility of various plants and fungi had weird experiences that suggested nature gods etc.

  67. RationalismRules says


    Drugs are the map not the territory.

    No, they are the ship that the cartographer sails on. Examining the ship tells us nothing about the accuracy of the map.

    [BTW, when you lift a slab of text from somewhere else, such as Wikipedia, it’s generally considered ethical to acknowledge it as a quote. <blockquote>quoted text</blockquote> is one way]

  68. Edward from london says

    Why Does God Allow Suffering?

    Has God caused the suffering in the world?

    What issue was raised in the garden of Eden?

    How will God undo the effects of human suffering?

    1, 2. What kind of suffering do people face today, leading many to ask what questions?

    AFTER a terrible battle in one war-torn land, the thousands of civilian women and children who had been killed were buried in a mass grave surrounded by markers. Each marker bore this inscription: “Why?” Sometimes that is the most painful question of all. People ask it sadly when war, disaster, disease, or crime takes their innocent loved ones, destroys their home, or brings them untold suffering in other ways. They want to know why such tragedies befall them.

    2 Why does God allow suffering? If Jehovah God is all-powerful, loving, wise, and just, why is the world so full of hatred and injustice? Have you ever wondered about these things yourself?

    3, 4. (a) What shows that it is not wrong to ask why God allows suffering? (b) How does Jehovah feel about wickedness and suffering?

    3 Is it wrong to ask why God allows suffering? Some worry that asking such a question means that they do not have enough faith or that they are showing disrespect for God. When reading the Bible, however, you will find that faithful, God-fearing people had similar questions. For example, the prophet Habakkuk asked Jehovah: “Why do you make me witness wrongdoing? And why do you tolerate oppression? Why are destruction and violence before me? And why do quarreling and conflict abound?”—Habakkuk 1:3.
    Grieving people around a small casket in a graveyard

    Jehovah will end all suffering

    4 Did Jehovah scold the faithful prophet Habakkuk for asking such questions? No. Instead, God included Habakkuk’s sincere words in the inspired Bible record. God also helped him to get a clearer understanding of matters and to gain greater faith. Jehovah wants to do the same for you. Remember, the Bible teaches that “he cares for you.” (1 Peter 5:7) God hates wickedness and the suffering it causes far more than any human does. (Isaiah 55:8, 9) Why, then, is there so much suffering in the world?

    5. What reasons are sometimes offered to explain human suffering, but what does the Bible teach?

    5 People of various religions have gone to their religious leaders and teachers to ask why there is so much suffering. Often, the response is that suffering is God’s will and that he long ago determined everything that would ever happen, including tragic events. Many are told that God’s ways are mysterious or that he brings death upon people—even children—so that he can have them in heaven with him. As you have learned, though, Jehovah God never causes what is bad. The Bible says: “It is unthinkable for the true God to act wickedly, for the Almighty to do wrong!”—Job 34:10.

    6. Why do many people make the mistake of blaming God for the suffering in the world?

    6 Do you know why people make the mistake of blaming God for all the suffering in the world? In many cases, they blame Almighty God because they think that he is the real ruler of this world. They do not know a simple but important truth that the Bible teaches. You learned that truth in Chapter 3 of this book. The real ruler of this world is Satan the Devil.

    7, 8. (a) How does the world reflect the personality of its ruler? (b) How have human imperfection and “time and unexpected events” contributed to suffering?

    7 The Bible clearly states: “The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” (1 John 5:19) When you think about it, does that not make sense? This world reflects the personality of the invisible spirit creature who is “misleading the entire inhabited earth.” (Revelation 12:9) Satan is hateful, deceptive, and cruel. So the world, under his influence, is full of hatred, deceit, and cruelty. That is one reason why there is so much suffering.

    8 A second reason why there is so much suffering is that, as discussed in Chapter 3, mankind has been imperfect and sinful ever since the rebellion in the garden of Eden. Sinful humans tend to struggle for dominance, and this results in wars, oppression, and suffering. (Ecclesiastes 4:1; 8:9) A third reason for suffering is “time and unexpected events.” (Read Ecclesiastes 9:11.) In a world without Jehovah as a protective Ruler, people may suffer because they happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    9. Why can we be sure that Jehovah has a good reason for allowing suffering to continue?

    9 It is comforting for us to know that God does not cause suffering. He is not responsible for the wars, the crimes, the oppression, or even the natural disasters that cause people to suffer. Still, we need to know, Why does Jehovah allow all this suffering? If he is the Almighty, he has the power to stop it. Why, then, does he hold back? The loving God that we have come to know must have a good reason.—1 John 4:8.

    10. What did Satan call into question, and how?

    10 To find out why God allows suffering, we need to think back to the time when suffering began. When Satan led Adam and Eve into disobeying Jehovah, an important question was raised. Satan did not call into question Jehovah’s power. Even Satan knows that there is no limit to Jehovah’s power. Rather, Satan questioned Jehovah’s right to rule. By calling God a liar who withholds good from his subjects, Satan charged that Jehovah is a bad ruler. (Read Genesis 3:2-5.) Satan implied that mankind would be better off without God’s rulership. This was an attack on Jehovah’s sovereignty, his right to rule.

    11. Why did Jehovah not just destroy the rebels in Eden?

    11 Adam and Eve rebelled against Jehovah. In effect, they said: ‘We do not need Jehovah as our Ruler. We can decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong.’ How could Jehovah settle that issue? How could he teach all intelligent creatures that the rebels were wrong and that his way truly is best? Someone might say that God should simply have destroyed the rebels and made a fresh start. But Jehovah had stated his purpose to fill the earth with the offspring of Adam and Eve, and he wanted them to live in an earthly paradise. (Genesis 1:28) Jehovah always fulfills his purposes. (Isaiah 55:10, 11) Besides that, getting rid of the rebels in Eden would not have answered the question that had been raised regarding Jehovah’s right to rule.

    12, 13. Illustrate why Jehovah has allowed Satan to become the ruler of this world and why God has permitted humans to govern themselves.

    12 Let us consider an illustration. Imagine that a teacher is telling his students how to solve a difficult problem. A clever but rebellious student claims that the teacher’s way of solving the problem is wrong. Implying that the teacher is not capable, this rebel insists that he knows a much better way to solve the problem. Some students think that he is right, and they also become rebellious. What should the teacher do? If he throws the rebels out of the class, what will be the effect on the other students? Will they not believe that their fellow student and those who joined him are right? All the other students in the class might lose respect for the teacher, thinking that he is afraid of being proved wrong. But suppose that the teacher allows the rebel to show the class how he would solve the problem.
    A teacher allowing a rebel student to show the class a supposed solution to a difficult problem

    Is the student more qualified than the teacher?

    13 Jehovah has done something similar to what the teacher does. Remember that the rebels in Eden were not the only ones involved. Millions of angels were watching. (Job 38:7; Daniel 7:10) How Jehovah handled the rebellion would greatly affect all those angels and eventually all intelligent creation. So, what has Jehovah done? He has allowed Satan to show how he would rule mankind. God has also allowed humans to govern themselves under Satan’s guidance.

    14. What benefit will come from Jehovah’s decision to allow humans to govern themselves?

    14 The teacher in our illustration knows that the rebel and the students on his side are wrong. But he also knows that allowing them the opportunity to try to prove their point will benefit the whole class. When the rebels fail, all honest students will see that the teacher is the only one qualified to lead the class. They will understand why the teacher thereafter removes any rebels from the class. Similarly, Jehovah knows that all honesthearted humans and angels will benefit from seeing that Satan and his fellow rebels have failed and that humans cannot govern themselves. Like Jeremiah of old, they will learn this vital truth: “I well know, O Jehovah, that man’s way does not belong to him. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.”—Jeremiah 10:23.

    15, 16. (a) Why has Jehovah allowed suffering to continue for so long? (b) Why has Jehovah not prevented such things as horrible crimes?

    15 Why, though, has Jehovah allowed suffering to go on for so long? And why does he not prevent bad things from happening? Well, consider two things that the teacher in our illustration would not do. First, he would not stop the rebel student from presenting his case. Second, the teacher would not help the rebel to make his case. Similarly, consider two things that Jehovah has determined not to do. First, he has not stopped Satan and those who side with him from trying to prove that they are right. Allowing time to pass has thus been necessary. In the thousands of years of human history, mankind has been able to try every form of self-rule, or human government. Mankind has made some advances in science and other fields, but injustice, poverty, crime, and war have grown ever worse. Human rule has now been shown to be a failure.

    16 Second, Jehovah has not helped Satan to rule this world. If God were to prevent horrible crimes, for instance, would he not, in effect, be supporting the case of the rebels? Would God not be making people think that perhaps humans can govern themselves without disastrous results? If Jehovah were to act in that way, he would become party to a lie. However, “it is impossible for God to lie.”—Hebrews 6:18.

    17, 18. What will Jehovah do about all the harm that has resulted from the rule of humans and the influence of Satan?

    17 What, though, about all the harm that has been done during the long rebellion against God? We do well to remember that Jehovah is almighty. Therefore, he can and will undo the effects of mankind’s suffering. As we have already learned, the ruining of our planet will be undone by the turning of the earth into Paradise. The effects of sin will be removed through faith in Jesus’ ransom sacrifice, and the effects of death will be reversed by means of the resurrection. God will thus use Jesus “to break up the works of the Devil.” (1 John 3:8) Jehovah will bring all of this about at just the right time. We can be glad that he has not acted sooner, for his patience has given us the opportunity to learn the truth and to serve him. (Read 2 Peter 3:9, 10.) Meanwhile, God has been actively seeking sincere worshippers and helping them to endure any suffering that may come upon them in this troubled world.—John 4:23; 1 Corinthians 10:13.

    18 Some might wonder, ‘Could all this suffering have been prevented if God had created Adam and Eve in such a way that they could not rebel?’ To answer that question, you need to remember a precious gift that Jehovah has given you.
    A grieving woman finding comfort from reading the Bible

    God will help you to endure suffering

    19. What precious gift has Jehovah given us, and why should we value it?

    19 As was noted in Chapter 5, humans were created with free will. Do you realize what a precious gift that is? God has made countless animals, and these are driven largely by instinct. (Proverbs 30:24) Man has made some robots that can be programmed to follow every command. Would we be happy if God had made us like that? No, we are glad to have the freedom to make choices about what kind of person to become, what course of life to pursue, what friendships to form, and so on. We love to have a measure of freedom, and that is what God wants us to enjoy.

    20, 21. How may we use the gift of free will in the best possible way, and why should we want to do so?

    20 Jehovah is not interested in service performed under compulsion. (2 Corinthians 9:7) To illustrate: What would please a parent more—a child’s saying “I love you” because he is told to say it or his saying it freely from the heart? So the question is, How will you use the free will that Jehovah has given you? Satan, Adam, and Eve made the worst possible use of free will. They rejected Jehovah God. What will you do?

    21 You have the opportunity to put the marvelous gift of free will to the best possible use. You can join the millions who have taken a stand on Jehovah’s side. They make God rejoice because they take an active part in proving Satan a liar and a miserable failure as a ruler. (Proverbs 27:11) You too can do that by choosing the right course of life. This will be explained in the next chapter.

    God does not cause the bad conditions in the world.—Job 34:10.

    By calling God a liar and saying that He withholds good from His subjects, Satan questioned Jehovah’s right to rule.—Genesis 3:2-5.

  69. RationalismRules says

    Still waiting for you to enlighten us as to the source of your latest addition to the Adam & Eve myth:

    God could of pre-programmed Adam and Eve with knowledge of Him but did not. Hence they were created as not knowing which is like all humans.

    It’s not from the bible. It can’t even be considered an interpretation of the biblical account – the bible says nothing about what knowledge Adam and Eve were created with. So where are you getting this additional ‘truth’ from, other than out of your butt?

  70. says

    re moldred @ 82:

    as with so-called psychics and occultists, we can and do study the techniques, history and culture of psychedelics. that is not in dispute. what zack and cyclone dust are clearly arguing for is the study of drug use as a means of obtaining information about reality. he may as well as argue for the study of occultists as a means for obtaining messages from the dead.

  71. Edward from london says

    87. God spoke to them directly. This is how they learned about God. God’s name is Jehovah. Adam and Eve were told this by God.

    So… are you upset with the way God communicated with them ?

    You would rather He put truth into their brains ?

  72. says

    Perhaps it is time for the hosts to channel a little Jeff Dee and challenge the obvious trolls. Letting them just meander on and on with nonsense wastes everyone’s time, and just encourages trolls to keep calling. Also a kind, but brisk “And what exactly is your point?” or “A feeling is not evidence.” type of challenge might work. As others have said I amazed at the patience of Jen and John trying to deal with these type of calls week after week.

  73. Monocle Smile says

    Now that the british chucklehead has started dropping preachy copypasta, can we please ban it?

  74. RationalismRules says


    God spoke to them directly. This is how they learned about God.

    Where does the bible tell you this is how they learned about God? Can you cite a verse, instead of simply pulling another unsupported assertion out of your butt?

  75. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    To Edward
    I skimmed your screed in post 86.

    First, it’s really impolite to take so long to get to your point when your point can be made really quickly.

    Second, in short, your argument is an argument by analogy: Because it’s a bad idea for teachers to refuse to hear-out a student in class when the student says that the teacher is wrong, therefore the Christian god should allow Satan to cause people to suffer.

    One of my favorite quotes is “argument by analogy is fraud”.

    Did you really say that?
    “Proof by analogy is fraud”. Yes; page 692 of TC++PL. A good analogy is an excellent way of illustrating an idea, but far too often such analogies are not accompanied by solid reasoning, data, etc.

    Allowing a student in class to try to refute the teacher is fundamentally different from allowing someone to inflict severe pain and suffering in an unwilling bystander. What the fuck is wrong with you for making such an obscene comparison!? Jesus Christ.

    This is the sort of extremely simplistic and fallacious reasoning that I see in Plato’s essay “Republic”, and I hate it just as much here as I do in Plato’s essay “Republic”. Funny enough, both were written to justify horrible atrocities by making use to ridiculous and non-sequitir “arguments by analogy”, comparing the role of the god / king to the role of some completely unrelated profession (teacher in your case, and IIRC sheep herder in Plato’s case).

  76. Monocle Smile says

    Yeah, Plato’s Republic is pretty horrible. I first encountered it when some apologist (in breath-takingly stupid manner) called it the “atheist bible.”

  77. says

    I liked the live audience interaction. You guys should maybe put a camera on them. Make it more personal, instead of watching the hosts looking somewhere off-camera…

  78. Edward from london says

    94. If God killed Satan as soon as he rebelled. other energy creatures would call God a dictator. Time is the greatest friend of truth.

  79. Edward from london says

    96. The truth will set you free.

    Accurate knowledge leads to everlasting life on Earth.

    Belief in the truth is beneficial if acted upon.

  80. Edward from london says

    Satan says he can do a better job of ruling than God, well we can all see the results of a Satanic system.

  81. RationalismRules says

    Still here. Still pontificating about ‘the truth’. Still unable to cite a source for your made-up nonsense.
    Your inability to simply admit that you made a mistake tells us more about your relationship to ‘truth’ than anything else you could offer.

  82. StonedRanger says

    This is a question directed at the people who run this blog. Is john/Edward going to be allowed to continue to use this site for his personal proselytizing? If he is, why? He is not interested in having a conversation, he just wants to preach. I cannot speak for anyone else, but this is getting to be some tiresome shit. If this was a one off I wouldn’t care. But this has been going on for years now. How about some relief from it? Pretty please?

  83. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    94. If God killed Satan as soon as he rebelled. other energy creatures would call God a dictator. Time is the greatest friend of truth.

    He still is a dictator. He’s known as the “lord of lords” and “king of kings” for a reason. I didn’t vote for him. You don’t vote for kings. Yet, he’s still going to put me in a lake of fire for eternity for not following asinine rules – purportedly.

  84. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    Regarding StonedRanger’s comment
    If it is the same guy, the guy that I’m thinking of, the Jehovah’s Witness, I agree that it’s probably time for a ban.

  85. CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain says

    @EnlightenmentLiberal #104:

    the guy that I’m thinking of, the Jehovah’s Witness

    It is.
    Comment: Axp Ep 20.12 – CompulsoryAccount7746 #148


    Ugg. Yep. Same as last thread. […] He’s going to ruin any thread that he’s in with his useless, dare I say disingenuous posts. He’s just reading from a script, or thereabouts, AFAICT.

    Comment: AXP Ep 946 – KiwiDaveo #48

    he is a Jehovah Witnesses I would suggest he not be allowed more airtime to preach to people via AXP which clearly what he is doing. JPs have a requirement to perform a minimum amount of proselytizing, standard commitment to ministry work is 840 hours a year. (Works out to about 16 hours a week).
    John is basically using AXP to log his hours of “witnessing” which has the advantage of being able to be done in his warm house.
    JWs are monitored in their conmmunication […] and aren’t allowed to engage in open dialogue with “outsiders” so John won’t honestly engage in a honest discussion of his personal beliefs […] If John was for example was to admit a personal doubt he faces the real possibility of being cutoff from loved ones who remain within the cult.

  86. Edward from london says

    Jesus is not God.

    Morality is subjective.

    God has the authority to set the rules.

    Anyone not living by the rules will be removed from God’s platform Earth.

    Everyone will HAVE to learn the truth whether you like it or not.

  87. Edward from london says

    Christendom made up the lie about Hell.Jesus went to Hell for 3 days. Hell is a place of non existence.

  88. Edward from london says

    Oh and….. Listen everybody…………

    Your knowing the truth is not the most important issue at the moment.

    You will ALL get to know the truth later.

    But many will decide not to obey Jehovah.

    I hope that that makes sense.

  89. RationalismRules says

    Since Edward/John/whoever is no longer even responding to people and is simply preaching his empty bullshit, I support calls for him to be banned.
    Wikipedia agrees with Sky Captain #105:

    To be counted, an individual must be a publisher, and report some amount of time preaching to non-members, normally at least an hour per month. Under certain circumstances, such as chronic and debilitating illness, members may report increments of 15 minutes. Jehovah’s Witnesses’ preaching activity is self-reported, and members are directed to submit a ‘Field Service Report’ each month. Baptized members who fail to submit a report every month are termed ‘irregular’. Those who do not submit a report for six continuous months are termed ‘inactive’.[2]

    “Keep the Word of Jehovah Moving Speedily”. Our Kingdom Ministry: 1. October 1982.

    Edward/John/whoever is just using us to fill out his timesheet.

  90. joxer says

    Wow could not listen to the whole segment on the clip for Zack – he’s an idiot that desperately wants to be an intellectual while holding to an incredibly biased worldview. They gave him way too much slack imho.

  91. Edward from london says

    115. I do not care about timesheets.

    I am a truth seeker.

    Satan said Job was serving God for selfish reasons.

    Satans system is an opportunity to show Satan is wrong, just as you are wrong too.

  92. alanf00 says

    Edward from London is obviously a Jehovah’s Witness. Not a typical one, but a JW nonetheless. He uses standard JW jargon and his statements show many of the areas of ignorance and misunderstanding specific to the JWs. All of it comes from decades of foolishness taught by the Watch Tower Society that has resulted in the muddled thinking of so many JWs like Edward.

    British author and former JW Alan Rogerson wrote in his 1969 book “Millions Now Living Will Never Die: A Study of Jehovah’s Witnesses”:

    “A long acquaintance with the literature of the Witnesses leads one to the conclusion that they live in the intellectual ‘twilight zone.’ That is, most of their members, even their leaders, are not well educated and not very intelligent. Whenever their literature strays onto the fields of philosophy, academic theology, science or any severe mental discipline their ideas at best mirror popular misconceptions, at worst they are completely nonsensical.”

  93. Evil God of the Fiery Cloud says

    ,blockquote>I am a truth seeker.

    Unless yer using a very peculiar definition of the word “truth” I’d say that’s been clearly demonstrated to be false.

  94. Edward from london says

    Note to self. People who believe that energy can become conscious by chance are deluded.

  95. Ian Anity says

    I could ask you to be more precise about your ‘coming soon’ answers but I don’t want to overtax your prevarication muscles too much. Instead, could you tell us how long you have been using the term ‘coming soon’ for the end of the world? Five years? Ten years? Forty two years?
    Do you not see that constant use of the ‘soon’ taints everything you say? Every statement you offer must be weighed against the years of ‘soon’ not happening.
    But you’ll continue to repeat the same tired old dogma, like a tawdry car salesman trying to tempt another sucker with a last-minute sale only to offer the same deal a week later.
    ‘Soon’ makes you pathetic.
    Don’t be pathetic please.

  96. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    I really want to engage with him, but I’m summoning all of my willpower to not.

  97. Edward from london says

    120. Everyone gets a second chance once they are brought back to life out of the common grave, hell.

    Some will not obey God and will be killed during the 1000 year rule of Jesus Christ.

    After the 1000 year rule of the heavenly government kingdom with Jesus as the king, Jesus will hand over the government to God.

    Then Satan will be released from the Abyss.

    Many perfect humans will follow Satan and be killed along with Satan. This is the second death.

    I am not wrong. Your being wrong is understandable because of this brainwashing system. You will be taught the truth, and you will have an opportunity to live forever on paradise Earth once God’s will is done on Earth.

    All will make an informed decision (to obey God or not) once the truth is revealed with extraordinary proof.

    I hope this makes sense. for more info.

  98. jigglefresh says

    I’m not sure why I had to create a new account(with the same name) but here is JiggleFresh, again. The only other time I have commented on this blog was in response to John/Edward/Sam/whatever other fake name from U.K.
    I read this blog regularly and would like to submit my “vote” that he should be banned. The fact that he feels the need, apparently, to change his name, both on this blog and on calls to the show, should exemplify his willingness to dispense with honesty. Almost as importantly, his unwillingness to engage in debate, in favor of mashing nonsense on the keyboard with his forehead, should do the trick.
    Previously, I called him a troll. The consensus seems to be that he is some flavor of JW. From what I’ve seen, I can’t tell the difference.
    I feel a little bad that the only times I have commented were in response to this human. So… great show, as always. Thank all of you for doing this.


  99. indianajones says

    Actually I don;t think Edward should be banned. HAHA only joking, oh my sides. I cite: ‘a repeated pattern of … saying the same thing over and over again without acknowledging any of the responses, can still get you banned’. I can get any amount of this kind of BS in under 5 minutes without effort. Please, I come here in part to get away from this stuff!!

  100. Edward from london says

    These videos are for Jen and John.

    Some people say they are not the gender they were born with which is a mental illness. I can change my name to whatever i want.

  101. Edward from london says

    Another video for my new friends, Jen and John.

    To all my haters …….. You are going to learn the truth whether you like it or not.

  102. Nathan says

    I seriously doubt Jen or John are paying attention to the drivel you post so you can fill out your time card.

  103. Edward from london says

    135. Yep…. Then you will be stuck with your confirmation bias.


    Time is the greatest friend of truth.

  104. Edward from london says

    126. So if name changing is dishonest, then so is pretending to be a different gender to that. that a person is born with.

    Who set the rule that i cannot change my name ?, i can call myself blue unicorn if i want to.

  105. Edward from london says

    There are a lot of easy to trigger people here.

    So why do u get triggered so easily ?

  106. Edward from london says

    Matt believes that energy cannot become conscious without intelligent manipulation.
    Or at least he is honest an admits that he does not know.

  107. says

    it is a mental illness its science that says this , its same they should not be in military when these groups of people have a 40% more suicide rate and you think thats smart to allow a group that is near half suicidal to have guns and protect us in the military its insane . also go look up Jordan Peterson and Gaad sad actual scientists and professors that show this is a mental illness a social construct it denies everything about biology .

  108. paxoll says

    There you go folks, incontrovertible evidence as to why the people in the UK are predominantly atheists.

  109. Monocle Smile says

    @Peter C
    I’m guessing you are ranting about transgender people. In that case, take your hacks in lab coats and cram them up your garbage ass. You’re barely literate and yet you post that nonsense about functional human beings.

  110. Edward from london says

    According to British law i can call myself a black female lizard, but it hinders communication when most will think of a black female lizard rather than the male white human that i am.

    Oh and… God is bout to destroy Christendom and Islam along with all false religions.

    Is it ok to call the show today ?

  111. says

    I used to think that Edward a raving lunatic and one of the simplest people I had ever heard.

    That is still a possibility, but I think that he is not. I actually think he is a performance artist. His voice is too Peter Cook playing E.L. Wisty for me.

    If you find clips of that, you will get my point.

  112. CompulsoryAccount7746, Sky Captain says

    @Shaun #148:

    one of the simplest people I had ever heard [ / ] he is a performance artist.

    Not mutually exclusive.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *