This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← [UPDATE]Heads-up to everyone - Bill O'Reilly response expected on Friday Oct 14th

[UPDATE]Heads-up to everyone - Bill O'Reilly response expected on Friday Oct 14th - Comments

Michael Austin's Avatar Comment 1 by Michael Austin

A response to what? His reworded email? His poor treatment of Richard? The fact that Richard's event was cancelled? To apologize for the fact that he exists?

Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:45:52 UTC | #880702

Agrajag's Avatar Comment 2 by Agrajag

Whatever the "response", it will probably be some sort of reflexive phenomenon. There are synapses around the rectum which are responsible, in Billy's case.
Steve

Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:50:20 UTC | #880703

cornbread_r2's Avatar Comment 3 by cornbread_r2

You didn't include the most obvious option: strawmen.

Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:50:37 UTC | #880704

chawinwords's Avatar Comment 4 by chawinwords

Whatever the response, it will fulfill the diarrhoetic connection and reality between O'Reilly's mouth and brain -- as usual. I suppose his large audience has the same connection, but between the ears and brain.

Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:56:53 UTC | #880705

DaveDodo007's Avatar Comment 5 by DaveDodo007

Can't wait after all the tides come in and the tides go out and I'm throwing it all in with Jesus and you atheist all kill people like Stalin, Mao and pot. I think I will pass on the great ignorances bleating just to keep myself sane.

Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:59:52 UTC | #880706

SheerReason's Avatar Comment 6 by SheerReason

Name a town, Name a Town, Name a town... If you wish to opine... but no bloviating! The tide comes in, and the tide goes out!

Can't wait to hear this :)

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:01:42 UTC | #880707

MorganZee's Avatar Comment 7 by MorganZee

Maybe Bill-O finally found out how the moon got where it is . The man is an idiot .

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:06:01 UTC | #880708

Metamag's Avatar Comment 8 by Metamag

Oh come on, it is perfectly predictable what he will say...he will just lie and distort and frame like he has been doing his entire career.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:09:13 UTC | #880710

mirandaceleste's Avatar Comment 9 by mirandaceleste

From CFI's Twitter:

Bill O'Reilly plans to comment on The Wyndgate Club and @RichardDawkins tomorrow @ 8 PM EST, on FOX. Check your local listings and tune in!

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:17:31 UTC | #880712

TV200's Avatar Comment 10 by TV200

Interesting?, debatable. Painful?,almost certainly. Wrong?, guaranteed.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:19:34 UTC | #880715

Quine's Avatar Comment 11 by Quine

Interesting? Maybe to some, but continuing what TV200 just wrote, almost certainly both wrong and ridiculous.

I will wait for it to get to the web where I can see the clip (I expect it to be short) without wasting my time on any other part of his pinhead on parade "show."

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:33:58 UTC | #880716

calliecparrish's Avatar Comment 12 by calliecparrish

I wonder what Bill O'Reilly is going to respond to? His poor treatment of professor Dawkins? That edited email? Oh how I want to know!

I wrote an email to Mr. Bill O'Reilly. I hope to heavens it's read. I wrote an earfull.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:36:52 UTC | #880718

DJGutekunst's Avatar Comment 13 by DJGutekunst

A few thoughts on the O'Reilly interview:

(1) As others have noted, O'Reilly (and other conservative Christians) always introduce Professor Dawkins as "_______ atheist" where the blank space can range from "noted" to "outspoken" to "strident." Hardly ever is there a mention of leadership in his academic field, widespread education and popularization of science, best-selling books, etc., etc.

(2) While I understand that many academics with terminal degrees are not publicly addressed as Doctor, I find O'Reilly's use of "Mr. Dawkins" (rather than Professor or Doctor) downright insulting. If I had the time and the stomach for it, I would watch O'Reilly's interviews of non-scientists to see if he ever addresses any of those guests as "Doctor." Last week several news outlets in the U.S. referred to the bigoted Southern Baptist mega-church preacher Mark Jeffress as "Dr. Jeffress" (he evidently has a PhD in theology or ministry...)

(3) I laughed aloud when the pictures of Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao Zedong were splashed across the screen. The extreme transparency of this pre-planned argument was pitiful. On the bright side, at least O'Reilly had the good sense not to play the (false) Hitler card. Perhaps there has been sufficient refutation of that myth and the religionists will stop trying to get away with using it.

(4) How telling it was that Richard knew the Ten Commandments better than O'Reilly did!

I cannot wait to watch a replay of the upcoming response.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:47:07 UTC | #880719

Bill Salt's Avatar Comment 14 by Bill Salt

Bill O'Reilly's is what happens when indoctrination and ignorance are applied to one's youth.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:57:23 UTC | #880721

Functional Atheist's Avatar Comment 15 by Functional Atheist

My prediction is that O'Reilly will defend the right of private enterprises, like the Wyndgate, to refuse service on any number of grounds. "No shirt, no shoes, no service" and bartenders cutting off the obnoxious and/or the drunk, and the like.

He'll also point out that the First Amendment is a protection from governmental restrictions on speech--that private employers for example can prohibit 'hate speech' at the workplace and remain entirely within the law.

He'll condemn talk of suing The Wyndgate as an overreaction, and an infringement on the rights of private enterprises and, more generally, on property rights.

But he'll then take the opportunity to preen about how his program is a 'spin-free zone' and will say that while the Wyndgate had every right to cancel Richard's event, they should not have, and that he is a champion of free discourse and the protection of unpopular speech and blah-di-blah-blah.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 01:12:33 UTC | #880723

coolegg's Avatar Comment 16 by coolegg

Maybe he has concluded that the tides don't always come in, and don't always go out, and sometimes there is a miscommunication?

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 01:24:14 UTC | #880724

UGAtheist's Avatar Comment 17 by UGAtheist

You were spot-on until that last paragraph. I'm not sure that would be in-character for him.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 01:25:00 UTC | #880725

QuestioningKat's Avatar Comment 18 by QuestioningKat

Comment 15 by Functional Atheist :

My prediction is that O'Reilly will defend the right of private enterprises, like the Wyndgate, to refuse service on any number of grounds. "No shirt, no shoes, no service" and bartenders cutting off the obnoxious and/or the drunk, and the like.

He'll also point out that the First Amendment is a protection from governmental restrictions on speech--that private employers for example can prohibit 'hate speech' at the workplace and remain entirely within the law.

He'll condemn talk of suing The Wyndgate as an overreaction, and an infringement on the rights of private enterprises and, more generally, on property rights.

But he'll then take the opportunity to preen about how his program is a 'spin-free zone' and will say that while the Wyndgate had every right to cancel Richard's event, they should not have, and that he is a champion of free discourse and the protection of unpopular speech and blah-di-blah-blah.

Sounds about right. I wonder if he will talk about breaking a contract?

Anyway, I hope its some really ugly comment so that it gets people talking.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 01:37:12 UTC | #880728

Marc Country's Avatar Comment 19 by Marc Country

Oh, yes, stay tooned.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 02:10:05 UTC | #880730

vaister's Avatar Comment 20 by vaister

Bill O'Reilly is despicable

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 03:12:34 UTC | #880731

BaltimoreOriole's Avatar Comment 21 by BaltimoreOriole

Do we have reason to think that the "response" has to do with the Dawkins interview? It may instead have to do with his more recent interview with Cornel West and Tavis Smiley.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 03:21:45 UTC | #880732

InYourFaceNewYorker's Avatar Comment 22 by InYourFaceNewYorker

Oh this should be interesting.

Now incidentally, today is my 31st birthday. ON YOUR KNEES EVERYBODY! ;)

Julie

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 03:24:45 UTC | #880733

Andrew B.'s Avatar Comment 23 by Andrew B.

Comment 15 by Functional Atheist :

My prediction is that O'Reilly will defend the right of private enterprises, like the Wyndgate, to refuse service on any number of grounds. "No shirt, no shoes, no service" and bartenders cutting off the obnoxious and/or the drunk, and the like.

He'll also point out that the First Amendment is a protection from governmental restrictions on speech--that private employers for example can prohibit 'hate speech' at the workplace and remain entirely within the law.

He'll condemn talk of suing The Wyndgate as an overreaction, and an infringement on the rights of private enterprises and, more generally, on property rights.

But he'll then take the opportunity to preen about how his program is a 'spin-free zone' and will say that while the Wyndgate had every right to cancel Richard's event, they should not have, and that he is a champion of free discourse and the protection of unpopular speech and blah-di-blah-blah.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say he does the opposite. Just to show what a big guy he is in admitting his ideological opponents have rights.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 03:37:57 UTC | #880735

aquilacane's Avatar Comment 24 by aquilacane

It will be sarcastic with intent to hurt feelings and promote hateful rabal

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 03:42:20 UTC | #880737

RDfan's Avatar Comment 25 by RDfan

Here’s my prediction of what he will say:

Bill-O: “Ya’know folks; I’m a fair-minded kinda guy, like Jesus. I like to give a man a fair crack at the whip. I do. So that’s what I did last week. On this very show, I extended my hand to someone I disagree with fundamentally (read: I hate the sonofab!tch terrorist-lefty God-hater!). Atheist in Chief Richard Dawkins was here. So I called him out on his atheism and God-hate. Guess what? For speakin’ God’s honest truth, a whole bunch of Leebrals got their Darwinian underwear in a twist and called for my head. Well, my Fellow Americans, guess who else calls for people’s heads? Yup: Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin and Bin Ladin. Hey, did you like how Stalin and Bin Ladin kinda rhymes? Nice, donchyathink? Thank me later! Anyway, as the Good Book says: tide comes in, tide goes out! See ya next time!”

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 03:51:24 UTC | #880739

Karen Hill Anton's Avatar Comment 26 by Karen Hill Anton

Comment 13 by DJGutekunst

Your point #2 well taken.

Refusing to address RD by his proper title was an insult. It was not even a sly insult, but outright and on-purpose to be rude and demeaning. This happens all the time as you see prominent people in the U.S. who would take hemlock before referring to the leader of the United States as President Obama.

O'Reilly's treatment of Richard was scandalous. Hardly civil. What can anyone expect from this upcoming response? The usual: lies and distortion.

Karen

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 04:11:00 UTC | #880740

binlid11's Avatar Comment 27 by binlid11

Have to say i am disappointed in Richard, he says he won't engage in conversation with creationists ,for very good reason to, but he allows himself to be interviewed by a moron like Bill O Reilly .I know he's only on there to promote his book..But I think he lowers himself going on that show....

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 04:57:04 UTC | #880746

InYourFaceNewYorker's Avatar Comment 28 by InYourFaceNewYorker

Comment 27 by binlid11 :

Have to say i am disappointed in Richard, he says he won't engage in conversation with creationists ,for very good reason to, but he allows himself to be interviewed by a moron like Bill O Reilly .I know he's only on there to promote his book..But I think he lowers himself going on that show....

I doubt it's even up to him. I think publishers make these decisions.

Julie

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 05:14:33 UTC | #880747

IDLERACER's Avatar Comment 29 by IDLERACER

THIS YouTube clip has now become legendary. At 1:39 O'Reilly unambiguously states that he can actually "see" Jesus. Unless he's prone to hallucinations, the only place he's ever "seen" Jesus is in the same places he's seen Zeus, Apollo and Thor. As a statue, in a painting on the wall, or an illustration in a book.

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 05:17:14 UTC | #880748

mirandaceleste's Avatar Comment 30 by mirandaceleste

Comment 21 by BaltimoreOriole :

Do we have reason to think that the "response" has to do with the Dawkins interview? It may instead have to do with his more recent interview with Cornel West and Tavis Smiley.

See comment #9

Fri, 14 Oct 2011 05:21:31 UTC | #880750