Bill O'Reilly Interviews Richard Dawkins
- Started
- Last post
- 129 Responses
- jevad0
ps O'Reilly got fucking pawned in that interview...
- k0na_an0k0
the only real thing i'll say is that i don't care for the way bill talks to people in that smug condescending way. he's a bitter, frightened little man who knows he's on his way out trying to get the most bang for his buck.
he's hiding behind the camera. i'd love to see him in the same room with snoop and a few of his boys.
- Ramanisky20
all O'Reilly really needs is a little of that LBC Chronic
*calls Snoop for an ounce bag of the Shizznizzy
- Brookoioioi0
Have you actually read any of his books flagellum?
- TheBlueOne0
I think it's telling that he has to spell "bane" for his audience...
O'Reilly is a intellectual gnat with the hubris (that's "h-u-b-r-i-s" for any O'Reilly fans) of a giant.
- jevad0
'The Dawkins Delusion' is a very fine example of the human need to believe in something, anything. The focus is on proving that Richard Dawkins work is flawed - it wouldn't matter who it was or what proofs are presented, the religious community will not accept anything that disagrees with their worldview. Theirs is a very narrow and closed view that refuses to see the true majesty of our universe and this book is yet another indication that they are running scared of anything that may be close to the truth. Don't forget, no amount of faith (and it was huge and globally absolute) that the earth was flat actually changed the facts - so much for faith.
- Brookoioioi0
But was there ever dog that praised his fleas?
W B Yeats
- flagellum0
It's not only people of faith taking Dawkins to task, it's his own colleagues. He ignores data, misrepresents data and knocks down a convenient strawman of "religion". The arguments raised in his book were answered ages ago. Allistair McGrath didn't think anyone would actually take Dawkins's book seriously. But the less discerning did, so he wrote a rebuttal.
- FrdmOfSpch0
he's back with avengence!
- flagellum0
Maybe there's a reason people need to believe in something. Maybe the fact that we are conscious beings who can behold and appreciate beauty, suggests that there is a greater consciousness. Maybe the design we see all around us suggests a designer.
- mrdobolina0
or maybe not?
- mrdobolina0
I just watched it, bill was quite tame actually.
- Brookoioioi0
So, are you going to dodge the question or answer it? Have you read the selfish gene, the blind watchmaker, the extened phenotype, river out of eden, climbing mount improbable, the ancestors tale or a devils chaplin?
- flagellum0
Not front to back, brookoi. Just passages from them. I've read enough papers by him and listened to enough interviews to know exactly where he is coming from. He makes no apologies for his militant theophobic atheism.
- jevad0
From time to time...I become fairly convinced that the Earth was created...by some other race...maybe a human race...or something even bigger than we can comprehend...and that we are constantly monitored as some sort of experiment...
- Brookoioioi0
No he doesn't, nor should he. But at least you're honest enough to admit you haven't read his work and therefore are not capable judging it.
- flagellum0
Careful, jevad. That would make you an ID proponent.
- flagellum0
wrong Brookoioi. As I said, I've read excerpts of his books and many of his papers.