Dawkins is quickly losing his grip on argument and becoming a showman. His capacity for over-simplification of his adveraries' arguments, even the very sophisticated arguments of some scientists who have engaged him recently, beggars belief. Does he not listen to what these people are saying. "Intelligent design" is not only about irreducible complexity. It is about positing the existence of God on the basis, among other things, of the "non physical" rationality that enables us to argue anything in the first place.

Someone has generously suggested that there are "new things" in this talk. What are they? There is absolutely nothing that is new here: his simplistic dismissal of Intelligent Design, his "no such thing as a Catholic child, a Protestant child". His "video-comedian" is clearly a man after Dawkins' own heart, but it has been on this sight before. Very scientific by the way, isn't it? Who would bother to ""send in a letter" in response to that drivel?