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

← Bill O'Reilly vs. Atheist Richard Dawkins

Bill O'Reilly vs. Atheist Richard Dawkins - Comments

DeanZappy's Avatar Comment 1 by DeanZappy

Bill O'Reilly really is pathetic.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:17:00 UTC | #404616

wainscotting's Avatar Comment 2 by wainscotting

"Stop shouting at me ... I've been warned about it."

Love you Dawkins

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:32:00 UTC | #404617

linbetwin's Avatar Comment 3 by linbetwin

Watch at 3:49, lol!

I still think atheists don't know how to answer these religious people. When BillO says atheists look down on believers, WHY doesn't Richard say that it's the other way round? That atheists are the most mistrusted group in America and that believers consider them un-American, evil Nazis? Why not talk about the widespread prejudice directed against atheists that makes them stay in the closet? I wish atheists learned to not let the ball fall into their own court.

I also think Richard fell intro Bill's trap by arguing about God instead of promoting his book on evolution.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:37:00 UTC | #404619

koldito's Avatar Comment 4 by koldito

Honestly, I don't really know why Dawkins even bothers to go to such interviews. Even if O'Reilly let's him talk for a full 10 seconds uninterrupted and his IQ magically manages to go above double digits for that time so that he can understand he just *might* be wrong, he's such a proud bigot that he'll keep rooting for Jebus.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:41:00 UTC | #404620

mdowe's Avatar Comment 5 by mdowe

I don't know why Prof. Dawkins would concede to sit in the same (virtual) room with Mr. O'Reilly once, much less twice, but Richard always manages to make clear points in short sound-bites, even as his interviewer fills up most of the time with the sound of his own voice. The clips come across as heavily edited, and I find myself wondering what Prof. Dawkins said that Fox cut out (if anything).

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:41:00 UTC | #404621

ods15's Avatar Comment 6 by ods15

This clip had a severe case of "Lord Privy Seal" syndrome... Way way too many images constantly showing up adding absolutely nothing to the discussion and just distracting.. That was just annoying...

Overall, lame...

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:54:00 UTC | #404622

Spiral's Avatar Comment 7 by Spiral

Always a delight to watch Prof. Dawkins' public appearances.

I love the way how O'Reilly says "faith-based beliefs like ID".
Spot on.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:58:00 UTC | #404623

godless_hoor's Avatar Comment 8 by godless_hoor

If being Irish means being like O'Reilly I'm changing my nationality. That cretin makes my blood boil.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:59:00 UTC | #404624

brogan's Avatar Comment 9 by brogan

I seem to have lost my tolerance for watching O'Reilly.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:11:00 UTC | #404627

azz_from_oz's Avatar Comment 10 by azz_from_oz

It seemed to me that Dawkins could have handled that interview alot better. Mentioning the Dover case in which the Judge (and hence the law) deemed ID and creation as 'not science' and using that statement as grounds to say that non-scientific ideals should not be taught in a scientific class room.

All in all, should have been handled far better. Dawkins has been in the political ring for some time now, this interview should have been a marker for his experience.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:12:00 UTC | #404628

Ilovelucy's Avatar Comment 11 by Ilovelucy

Comment #422847 by godless_hoor on October 10, 2009 at 2:59 pm

If being Irish means being like O'Reilly I'm changing my nationality. That cretin makes my blood boil.


Well, most Irish Americans are only Irish in a purely homeopathic sense anyway!

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:13:00 UTC | #404629

pernickety's Avatar Comment 12 by pernickety

O'Reilly doesn't really seem to get the idea of science does he? I like that he conceded that the story of adam and eve shouldn't be taught in science classes. Progress of a kind as Hitchens would say.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:23:00 UTC | #404630

AmandaKCampbell's Avatar Comment 13 by AmandaKCampbell

I love Dr. Dawkins' facial expressions throughout. They speak volumes. :-)

Not that I think O'Reilly has put actual thought into most of what he said, but I do wonder how he would explain the difference between "presenting" ID/Creationism in the classroom vs. "turning" to it as he repeatedly asserted.

Also, how is he going to split hairs to say don't bother presenting on Adam&Eve, but do "present" the concept of ID? It sounds like he's just unwilling to let go of the beliefs he was raised with, even though he knows at least some of it is "theology," a.k.a. myths and stories.

Perhaps the reason O'Reilly clings so steadfastly to Christianity is because of his personal insecurities. The promise of unconditional love must be pretty potent for a person who is so adept at erecting barriers between themselves and their fellow humans and pushing them away (so it seems from his TV persona, anyway). Poor thing, he just needs a time-out, a hug, and some consciousness-raising.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:28:00 UTC | #404632

epicure's Avatar Comment 14 by epicure

"Poor thing, he just needs a time-out, a hug..."

After you...

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:36:00 UTC | #404633

Agrajag's Avatar Comment 15 by Agrajag

Dawkins is grace under fire personified here. But one hardly notices because O'Reilly is such a moron. Also, linbetwin has a good point; the book is about evolution, which isn't to do with O'Reilly's chief concern, "how everything started". The controversy should have been over the moment Billy said he accepts evolution. But... there's time to fill, viewers to entertain, IQ points to lose...
Steve

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:42:00 UTC | #404634

Corylus's Avatar Comment 16 by Corylus

Comment #422845 by ods15:

This clip had a severe case of "Lord Privy Seal" syndrome... Way way too many images constantly showing up adding absolutely nothing to the discussion and just distracting.. That was just annoying...
It was also very manipulative.* The man knows his audience.

*Edit - as was the introduction as 'Mr' Dawkins.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:48:00 UTC | #404636

wkriski's Avatar Comment 17 by wkriski

News has become entertainment, short sound bites that really don't get to the heart of any discussion.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:51:00 UTC | #404638

AmandaKCampbell's Avatar Comment 18 by AmandaKCampbell

@epicure : Hahaha! Sure! I really see him as such a sad, angry little boy in a man-suit. The crazy he comes up with is mind-boggling, but it really only makes me feel a mixture of incredulity and pity.

I wonder if he even read Dr. Dawkins' book? I'm not sure if he veered them off onto the topic of The God Delusion simply to get the endorphin high of stimulating his own rage-center, or because he simply had nothing intelligent to ask about the NEW book. It seems that a lot of interviewers are focusing more on the previous book than the current one.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:52:00 UTC | #404639

BigJohn's Avatar Comment 19 by BigJohn

I truly do not comprehend how BillO, and his ilk, can live from day to day with such a blockheaded outlook. How is it possible to completely ignore the science evident in daily life? I do understand how they became as they are, but, I wonder how they can remain that way in light of the plethora of available evidence.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:52:00 UTC | #404640

NewEnglandBob's Avatar Comment 20 by NewEnglandBob

The lower the IQ, the louder they talk and the more they talk over others.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:59:00 UTC | #404641

glid's Avatar Comment 22 by glid

Is it just me or does Bill O'Reilly not (obviously) only come off as an idiot but also as totally unprofessional?
It's like Fox drove to a christian school for troubled youths and kidnapped the most loud-mouthed, annoying, arrogant, chauvinistic and egocentric asshole - and threw him straight onto a news presenters chair in front of the cameras. If he's had some journalistic training, it certainly doesn't show.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:00:00 UTC | #404643

Big City's Avatar Comment 21 by Big City

What an asshole.

Nothing on Earth is more hypocritical than Bill O'Reilly saying we should all follow the teachings of Jesus and there will be peace on Earth. Not with clowns like him around, there won't. If Jesus were alive today, O'Reilly, Rush, and Glenn Beck would hate him. I think what he really means is that conservatives won't stop fighting until everyone thinks like they do.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:00:00 UTC | #404642

Misc's Avatar Comment 23 by Misc

Something tells me Bill'O would have been the first to blow up in indignation if somebody he disagreed with called one of his points "fascistic". I'm just amazed this idiot is not ashamed to throw around a term associated with some of the worst atrocities that flippantly.

Anyway, I can't help but think that Dara O Briain's quote "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" could have been wonderfully used in this interview...

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:03:00 UTC | #404645

c4chaos's Avatar Comment 24 by c4chaos

someone please send this letter from Albert Einstein to Bill O'Reilly - http://www.lettersofnote.com/2009/10/word-god-is-product-of-human-weakness.html

O'Reilly probably would scoff at it too.

~C

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:23:00 UTC | #404649

yanquetino's Avatar Comment 25 by yanquetino

It was more than obvious to me that O'Reilly hadn't even opened Dawkins' book. He didn't ask anything about it! Rather than show even a single example of evidence for evolution covered in TGSOE, O'Reilly instead displayed an array of pictures of Jesus, for crying out loud! This was NOT an interview about Dawkins' book: O'Reilly simply wanted to repeat for all his devout viewers that he chooses to "go with Jesus."

What galls me the most is that O'Reilly's program is supposed to be a "no spin zone," yet religion is the most notorious example of "spin." How the "no spin master" O'Reilly can keep a straight face while asserting a belief in something for which there is not ONE iota of evidence is beyond me.

What a crock of caca. I have lost all respect for him.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:27:00 UTC | #404650

jamiso's Avatar Comment 26 by jamiso

RD...Please Please Please go on Glen Beck.

Seriously, it would be like the most funny thing ever

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:30:00 UTC | #404652

Magic Banana's Avatar Comment 27 by Magic Banana

Bill can't seem realize that his Christian beliefs have nothing to with science. Dawkins should have said that if Bill wants the Christian God overseeing evolution crap taught as an alternative, then they should also teach that a magic purple mongoose also could have overseen evolution etc etc...

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:31:00 UTC | #404653

Quine's Avatar Comment 28 by Quine

<!-- -->Comment #422862 by AmandaKCampbell:

I wonder if he even read Dr. Dawkins' book?
No. Bill does not read books; he has staff for that who prep his talking points. That is why he goes straight to what he wants to say, which in this case was calling science education methodology "fascist." Richard did better this time, and calling B.O. down on the shouting was the best moment, given that no actual reasoning was going to happen in any case.

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 16:04:00 UTC | #404659

funkydrummer's Avatar Comment 30 by funkydrummer

I love how Bill thinks that because a majority believes it then it must be true and has to be taught. Would love to see Richard on Glenn BecK I have not seen Glenn cry in a while!

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 16:05:00 UTC | #404661

Big City's Avatar Comment 29 by Big City

I wonder if O'Reilly thinks that, at the beginning of every Math course, teachers should say "Christians believe God gave us mathematics so we could quantify the different aspects of our marvelously created world." or, at the beginning of every English course that "Christians believe God gave us language so that we could spread the news of his glorious love."

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 16:05:00 UTC | #404660