Richard Dawkins on Canning Bill O'Reilly

If we want to enhance our public debates and earnestly confront the looming issues of our day, the famed biologist believes that the first step is getting rid of unqualified TV hosts like Bill O'Reilly.

Check out the rest of Richard Dawkins' interview at http://bigthink.com/richarddawkins.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• bigthink
• Richard
• Dawkins
• Bill
• O'Reilly

[MrDarksidematter]

Bill O'Reiley is just a massive twat and Prof Dawkins would own in him in any debate, period.

[Stevoukos]

@indianslummer Have you seen his so called "interview" in the O'Reilly Factor?

Bill didn't let Dawkins speak for more than a minute...

O'Reilly's arguments were stupid and ignorant to say the least..

[Arborem]

@Pirate44444 As a historian, I can tell you that this statement is wrong. For example, Alchemy was considered a valid science once upon a time. There was also once a time in which we thought that rain created frogs and that maggots spawned on rotten meat. We came to those two conclusions by a scientific method. We saw the meat, then later we saw maggots on it. Thusly, people assumed based on the evidence they had.

That is what science is. Assuming based on the evidence you have, then adjusting

[Pirate44444]

@IWEEW There is no "we thought this, then found out we were wrong, then thought this and found out that was wrong too, so why should we think what we know now is true" trend. Scientific advancements NEVER show we were totally wrong in the past, they only make us more right. A theory will only be improved, not over turned. This is not arrogance. Example: Newton mechanics and the theory of relativity.

[Pirate44444]

@IWEEW Dawkins calls O'Reilly an idiot because he is, not because of his beliefs.

Belief that the Earth was at the centre of the universe/flat came about without the modern scientific method. Evolution and global warming are however the result of the scientific method. No this is not a trend. The random guesses of bronze age peoples are not the same as the vast amounts of research and study of modern science.

[ScreenMonkeyMan]

all of this name calling is getting very sad. lets stick to finding the facts and not calling each other dumb, please

[officialvangcreative]

@Stevoukos yeah o reilly sounded like a kid arguing with another kid on the playground... "because i don't believe a meteor came and 'made everything happen", etc...

[bulldogbell1980]

Nice argument Rich but ratings earn themselves. Oh, Dawkings only said "intelligent" four times in thirty six seconds.

[LordSolarAwesome]

oh snap!

[ponchred]

@IWEEW Furthermore, why do our current temperaments even matter? I'm not angry, I'm laughing at your ignorance here! See how easy it is to pontificate over a piece of irrelevant data? Why does that matter in the debate? Why not instead say something tangible to back yourself up rather than to play on personal emotion? LOL.

[ponchred]

@IWEEW So you're better than me because you're calm and I'm succinctly expressing myself with more than one post? Oh I see. Astounding logic. More posts = more emotion, that's just a certainty. Ah, and now I'm in a homosexual relationship with Richard Dawkins? That's mature of you. What gave it away? The island lizard research doesn't give you a right to be ignorant. Which you totally are. Instead you could take note, and admit that evolution has legs. But you won't. Because you're a moron.