Richard Dawkins on the Late Late

branie

anyone here watching it now?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Tubridy is a plonker.

liamw

look at all those people putting their hands up for believing in god... seems tragic.. i wish they would have picked one of them at random and questioned their beliefs

Corkfeen

Was surprised that there weren't a few more atheists in audience.
Anyone else think that Dawkins was a bit annoyed at Tubridy jumping to god delusion rather his new book?

Morgase

Yeah just saw it there. I actually feel quite embarrassed at the tone Tubridy used to interview him.

Morbert

What a useless interview. 90% of it was about his LAST book, for the sole purpose of stirring some ****.

Byron85

God dam Tubridy was twat. He kept pressing Dawkins about god etc and wouldn't talk about his new book. When Dawkins finally called him out on it, he seemed annoyed when he had to, Tubridy just passed it off and carried on. :mad:

Aldebaran

Wow, that interview was bad. Asking Dawkins about his own funeral, where the fcuk was that going?

Calibos

Better than the Pat Kenny Late Late with RD in that Tubridy didn't let him get ambushed by fundy idiots in the audience and the one audience member involved was an intelligent priest. Worse than the Pat Kenny Late Late with RD in that with Pat Kenny you felt he was fair with RD and performing the role of Devils advocate when putting to RD some of the loopier questions whereas with Tubridy, it disn't sound like he was playing devils advocate, he sounds like a believer himself. It really felt like he as throwing live hand grenades for Dawkins to catch. Him making the facetious comparisons between the easter bunny and God and getting Dawkins to agree.

stevejazzx

Hmmmm judging by that show of hands we're not very well represented by your average Late Late audience. I'd say about 95% of people had their hands up for belief. Such a shame to be Irish in this time.

Re: Turbidy - whoever it was I told you so! Absolute moronic interviewer I'm switching over to J Ross, that's how bad it is.

Dave!

That'll teach me to stay in watching the Late Late Show on a Friday......

Cringeworthy.

Tzetze

When Dawkins made the point for brain-size to continue increasing in humans' future evolution requiring intelligent people to pump out the most offspring, I hoped for the question 'Who in the audience have large numbers of kids?' Guaranteed that all the same hands would have went up!

bmowner

seems though, that creationism rules in Irish Society!

Dades

That was painful. Stupid questions and a token (but likeable) opposing opinion in the audience.

I'm loathe to admit it, but I also was embarrassed by the all the hands in the audience.

Seriously - is it Saturday night? The LL Show is Tubridy Tonight a day early.

hullaballoo

I'm disheartened to see the reaction here. I'm struggling to believe that no one thought Dawkins was actually worse in terms of standing by his point of view than Tubridy or the priest. He was like Cowen standing over his term as Finance Minister.

At least the priest paid Dawkins some respect. The same couldn't be said for Dawkins who barreled through the interview denying that anyone has a right to believe in anything but the non-existence of God, skirting around questions with bland analogies and mincing his words.

Now, I'm hardly objective on this, because I'm an (often ardent) atheist. However, anyone with a grain of decency should at least respect that not everyone holds your views and not everyone who doesn't hold those views is deluded. I somehow doubt the qualifications of a man who says, 'science explains everything'. It doesn't. Ok, religion explains SFA, but until everything can be proven by scientific means, some scope for flexibility of beliefs needs to be maintained.

His attitude was utterly condescending and I don't blame Tubridy for being 'smart' with him.

Corkfeen

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

God dam Tubridy was twat. He kept pressing Dawkins about god etc and wouldn't talk about his new book. When Dawkins finally called him out on it, he seemed annoyed when he had to, Tubridy just passed it off and carried on. :mad:

T'was funny when he said to priest. "I'm delighted that you've gone back to my new book rather than the old one."

super_furry

I'd lean towards Dawkins beliefs but the arrogence and contempt with which he puts his points accross does him no favours.

Nor does the fact that he was clearly only interested in selling his book.

Dades

Actually, hullaballoo, I think you have a point. Dawkins did come off a bit smug. "I'm right and everyone else is stupid" kinda thing.

So basically everyone involved deserves a slap.

His attitude was condescending, but do you blame him? Tubridy questioned him about a topic that doesn't relate to his new book, he spent 90% of the interview talking about that topic; Dawkins was there to promote and talk about his new book, not his book of three years ago. If I were Richard, I'd have been annoyed too, and I'm sure that annoyance would have evinced itself as condescension.

pinksoir

Both yer man from tonight and Gerard Casey were my lecturers in philosophy when I was in UCD.

Ironically enough, Casey lectured logic... Always liked yer man from tonight though.

Re: the audience, what do you expect? What type of people would actually want to attend a Late Late Show? It's Grimsville, population moronic.

Naikon

hullaballoo wrote: »

I somehow doubt the qualifications of a man who says, 'science explains everything'. It doesn't. Ok, religion explains SFA, but until everything can be proven by scientific means, some scope for flexibility of beliefs needs to be maintained.

Science:

(1 It does not explain everything...yet
(2 It'š far more logical to assume we do not have an explanation
for something yet, than to pretend 'god done it'

super_furry

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

His attitude was condescending, but do you blame him? Tubridy questioned him about a topic that doesn't relate to his new book, he spent 90% of the interview talking about that topic; Dawkins was there to promote and talk about his new book, not his book of three years ago. If I were Richard, I'd have been annoyed too, and I'm sure that annoyance would have evinced itself as condescension.

I'd suggest that the general Irish public would have limited knowledge of him and would be more interested in hearing him talk about what he is most well known for. I'd have no interest in hearing Dawkins talk about evolution and I felt that Tubridy asked the question that most people (myself included) would have wanted him to.

Naikon

Some thoughts:

Turbidy is still a twat, and will probably remain a twat.
Also, the show of hands for god was a bit disheartning:(

Roro4Brit

I actually logged on to start a post about this and I saw on the home page one had just started.

I have always considered Ryan a retard and tonight has confirmed it. I was about to go to bed when I heard him introduce Dawkins so of course I watched it in anticipation of a good theological or scientfic debate with some interesting and hopefully eye opening discussions. Instead Ryan proved to be an embarrassment to the country yet again.

Firstly, he did nothing but talk about the topic of The God Delusion and not his new book.

Secondly, he had done zero research, had clearly never read a word written by the man and as far as I could tell, all he knew was that 'some english bloke who didn't believe in God' was coming on the show.

His questions were inept and lacking any substance. His posture was defensive and dismissive. He had a constant smirk on his face and not once did he attempt to actually dig deep into any of the questions instead asking retarded questions like 'have you thought about your funeral' and asking him to speculate what humans will look like millions of years from now. His linguistic repertoire was laughable forcing phrases into the chaps mouth like 'easter bunny' later using the term to mock the mans arguement.

Then to top it off, he decided to ask for a show of hands of those who believe in God as if his pathetic audience of 100 people were some sort of credible source on theological matters....oh look 95% of Irish retards say they believe in God ergo God exists.

All in all it was a disgrace of an interview that has forever cemented Ryan as one of the most hateable people on the planet in my mind.

I'd be tempted to write a letter or ring RTE however I've a sneaking suspicion it would fall on deaf ears....

RYAN YOU ARE A ****

Morgase

hullaballoo wrote: »

I'm disheartened to see the reaction here. I'm struggling to believe that no one thought Dawkins was actually worse in terms of standing by his point of view than Tubridy or the priest. He was like Cowen standing over his term as Finance Minister.

At least the priest paid Dawkins some respect. The same couldn't be said for Dawkins who barreled through the interview denying that anyone has a right to believe in anything but the non-existence of God, skirting around questions with bland analogies and mincing his words.

Now, I'm hardly objective on this, because I'm an (often ardent) atheist. However, anyone with a grain of decency should at least respect that not everyone holds your views and not everyone who doesn't hold those views is deluded. I somehow doubt the qualifications of a man who says, 'science explains everything'. It doesn't. Ok, religion explains SFA, but until everything can be proven by scientific means, some scope for flexibility of beliefs needs to be maintained.

His attitude was utterly condescending and I don't blame Tubridy for being 'smart' with him.

super_furry wrote: »

Nor does the fact that he was clearly only interested in selling his book.

In fairness, he was on the show to talk about his new book and not the old one. So I don't see why Tubridy had to waste the man's time by dragging up the old book and almost ignoring the new book.

Sure the Nolan sisters were on it earlier to promote their comeback album and tour, it's the very same thing and there's nothing wrong with it. Self-promotion is what half the interviews on TLL are for anyway.

Agricola

I dont blame Dawkins really. He is a blunt man (with good reason) and Tubridy hit him with lots of loaded questions...............
"So Richard, you see all these people with their hands up, they're all deluded are they?"
Of course Dawkins is going to answer yes to that question. If he starts getting wishey washey about it, he knows the religious people will jump down his throath and take it that hes not as sure of himself as he thinks he is.

Aside from the whole "Irish people are very gullible" debate, its Tubridy's interviewing technique that completely lacks any kind of finesse. He sposed to be asking the man about his new book, and all he did was barely mention it in 1 or 2 questions. And I never thought Id say it but I think Pat Kenny would have actually handled it better. Tubridy just struck me as not being in the slightest bit interested in what he had to say, more in stirring up the usual anti-atheist sentiment. And as someone else mentioned, he came across as believer who was kind of cross examining Dawkins on his way of thinking.

Tubridy looked very very lightweight tonight.

Byron85

super_furry wrote: »

I'd suggest that the general Irish public would have limited knowledge of him and would be more interest in hearing him talk about what he is most well known for.

Evolution is what he is most well known for along with his theory of a gene centred form of evolution and natural selection. The whole God thing comes along later.

fisgon

super_furry wrote: »

I'd lean towards Dawkins beliefs but the arrogence and contempt with which he puts his points accross does him no favours.

Nor does the fact that he was clearly only interested in selling his book.

The problem is that Dawkins is just not very socially adept. Like a lot of very intelligent people he is lacking somewhat in the area of people skills and so comes across as arrogant and condescending. His whole manner of the English gent is not really one that would appeal to Irish people.

Also, not sure why all the hands of the theists going up is depressing, what should we expect? It's simply the default setting for this society, for people who dont' really think about it a belief in god is just what is normal. Doesn't mean any of them are actually religious.

Handsome Bob

Dades wrote: »

Actually, hullaballoo, I think you have a point. Dawkins did come off a bit smug. "I'm right and everyone else is stupid" kinda thing.

So basically everyone involved deserves a slap.

This is a new thing? :pac:

Raging that I missed this, I actually went out of my way to find out who the guests were tonight, and all I could find were the Nolans. :rolleyes:

Morbert

hullaballoo wrote: »

I'm disheartened to see the reaction here. I'm struggling to believe that no one thought Dawkins was actually worse in terms of standing by his point of view than Tubridy or the priest. He was like Cowen standing over his term as Finance Minister.

At least the priest paid Dawkins some respect. The same couldn't be said for Dawkins who barreled through the interview denying that anyone has a right to believe in anything but the non-existence of God, skirting around questions with bland analogies and mincing his words.

Now, I'm hardly objective on this, because I'm an (often ardent) atheist. However, anyone with a grain of decency should at least respect that not everyone holds your views and not everyone who doesn't hold those views is deluded. I somehow doubt the qualifications of a man who says, 'science explains everything'. It doesn't. Ok, religion explains SFA, but until everything can be proven by scientific means, some scope for flexibility of beliefs needs to be maintained.

His attitude was utterly condescending and I don't blame Tubridy for being 'smart' with him.

Most of the things you have said about Dawkins are obviously false. He was respectful, and never once claimed science explains everything. Nor did he deny the right to believe.

Dawkins was perfectly respectful. The priest was perfectly respectful. Tubridy hijacked the interview to try and kick up a storm (thankfully his plan failed miserably). The interview was not supposed to be about the God Delusion. The interview was supposed to be about Evolution and the book "The Greatest Show on Earth". It was an absolute joke.

Dades

Anyone catch Jimmy Carr?

Their brief chat about God and atheism made up for the Dawkins disaster.
Great stuff altogether.

Morbert

Dades wrote: »

Anyone catch Jimmy Carr?

Their brief chat about God and atheism made up for the Dawkins disaster.
Great stuff altogether.

DAMMIT! I switched over. Why was it good, out of curiosity?

Roro4Brit

Even Jimmys jokes on religion were wasted on that audience...seriously what was with that fukin audience...

Agricola

fisgon wrote: »

Also, not sure why all the hands of the theists going up is depressing, what should we expect? It's simply the default setting for this society, for people who dont' really think about it a belief in god is just what is normal. Doesn't mean any of them are actually religious.

Exactly. The idea of even having a show of hands was moronic. Would anyone actually think it would be any other result. And how many people put up their hands because its the default position which doesnt make them an outsider with their family and friends.

Dawkins on the late late show should mean an interesting and informative debate about a fundamentally interesting subject. We should make good use of the opportunity of having such a fierce intellect in Ireland - Im surprised he even came on tbh. Instead RTE goes for the usual predictable rubbish.

Handsome Bob

Dades wrote: »

Anyone catch Jimmy Carr?

Their brief chat about God and atheism made up for the Dawkins disaster.
Great stuff altogether.

I saw it, that's how I found out Dawkins was on it earlier. Jimmy surprisingly was not smug or in major "comedian mode" when talking about religion, very likeable chap all together.

hullaballoo

Naikon wrote: »

Science:

(1 It does not explain everything...yet
(2 It'š far more logical to assume we do not have an explanation
for something yet, than to pretend 'god done it'

I'm not having a go at you here but the tenor of your post implies that you feel it is necessary to be blunt and explain the nature of science and logic to me.

Simply because I think Dawkins was unnecessarily fervent in his views does not mean that I believe in God. I even said I don't in my post. I was pointing to his lack of courtesy to the beliefs of others.

It's important to remember that most people in Ireland are brought up, being taught in school and often at home that God exists. Many of them are wise enough not to believe in the teachings of the established church anymore, but if you take God away from them, they will have too many questions. Just because you have I have my answers in relation to the soul and what happens after death, doesn't mean I'm ever going to try and take God away from someone else.

People will embrace those beliefs that are most sensible to them at any given time. Some change their beliefs over time, but many are happy to blindly accept what's been given to them and won't think about them until they need to.

Aldebaran

Dades wrote: »

Their brief chat about God and atheism made up for the Dawkins disaster.
Great stuff altogether.

+1

"If we're all God's children then what makes Jesus so special?"

YFlyer

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

Evolution is what he is most well known for along with his theory of a gene centred form of evolution and natural selection. The whole God thing comes along later.

Yes but he does spend a significant amount of time on the whole God thing

liamw

Agricola wrote: »

Dawkins on the late late show should mean an interesting and informative debate about a fundamentally interesting subject. We should make good use of the opportunity of having such a fierce intellect in Ireland - Im surprised he even came on tbh. Instead RTE goes for the usual predictable rubbish.

Very true. That interview was just annoying...

Dave!

I'm 3 minutes into this interview and it's already 1000 x more intelligent than Tubridy's

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/09/richard-dawkins-in-conversation-with-james-harding-editor-of-the-times.html

Worth a watch

GhostInTheRuins

What a terrible interview, "Have you thought about your funeral?" Come on...

This is the first time I've seen the LLS with Tubs, and I don't plan on watching it anytime soon either.

Really shocked how many people raised their hands though, but in fairness, the people that go to the LLS probably aren't like the rest of us.

ironingbored

Tubridy was unbelievably childish in his questioning and came across as deluded as the audience. What should have been an engaging debate on evolution, Darwin, religion and the beauty of the natural world turned into a village hall kerfuffle about the easter bunny.

Jimmy Carr is an absolute legend who rose above a sickening lethargic public.

Having said that I do think Richard could try to better understand the audience he has in front of him. He can come across as condescending to a group of ill-informed people from a scientific point of view. I think certain audiences need to be met half way and coaxed into further reading and enquiry.

Although not overtly surprised by the show of hands my heart did sink somewhat. We have a lot of work to do!

Giggy

Tzetze wrote: »

When Dawkins made the point for brain-size to continue increasing in humans' future evolution requiring intelligent people to pump out the most offspring, I hoped for the question 'Who in the audience have large numbers of kids?' Guaranteed that all the same hands would have went up!

Doubt it!

ironingbored

ironingbored wrote: »

We have a lot of work to do!

Yes, a lot of work.

YFlyer

ironingbored wrote: »

We have a lot of work to do!

Why bother, everyone to themselves

hullaballoo

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Yes, a lot of work.

Though, looking at it this way, far fewer people are querying the existence of RD.

stevejazzx

How is it smug of Dawkins to confirm his (utterly well known) beliefs when he is childishly challenged by a moronic interviewer? Only people that are not familiar with Dawkins call him smug. Watch a lecture or long interview, he is humble, he is down to earth and he does come across as a throughly nice guy. He simply does not entertain an intermediary, illogical moderation of his belief for the sake of people who are offended by his view.

Roro4Brit

Defending truth is important. Agnostics are under threat in many part of the world...the simple attitude of the audience towards this man tonight provides a good example of the attitudes of many.

From what I see is that for every person who becomes enlightened to the truth, there are four more who move closer to their religious beliefs...

It's funny how people are so quick to defend their religious beliefs which agnosticism/atheism is the real belief under threat

Dave!

Watch this interview
http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/09/richard-dawkins-in-conversation-with-james-harding-editor-of-the-times.html

Funny bit at about 17 mins when he discusses the atheist's nightmare

ironingbored

YFlyer wrote: »

Why bother, everyone to themselves

Well,

1) because it's true.
2) because religious moderates enable fundamentalists
3) because we have one life and should do everything we can to dissuade others from wasting theirs preparing for eternal adulation of a non-existent entity.

As I said in another thread: I ask myself how different the world would be if all the wasted energy that religious people put into reading scripture, praying, going on pilgrimmages, etc. wasn't redirected towards scientific inquiry, research and learning. If every priest, imam and rabbi were a doctor, scientist or researcher.

Zamboni

I am just back from the Late Late show.

I can't believe I had to sit through the Nolans and the Corona's for that interview.

I was one of (I think around 8 of us) the ones who put up the hand for not believing in God.
I was actually shocked because there were a fair few young people.

Tubridy was a disgrace. Dawkins probably waived the appearance fee to publicise his new book and Tubridy played the god card going on about TGD.

10/10 to Jimmy Carr. I had read previously he was an atheist so I am glad he came out with some good one liners.

Dawkins left in a hurry, probably despondent at the state of Ireland...