Dawkins: “It is a most extraordinary piece of warped logic to say that because science cannot answer a particular question, you’re going to throw in your lot with Jesus.”
O’Reilly: “Here is why I do not throw my lot in with science, science does not advance the human condition in any moralistic way and Jesus did.”
Dawkins: “Why would you muddle up the question of keeping your moral compass for life, which is important, with the other question which is explaining the nature of the world, the nature of life, the nature of the universe? That’s what science is about.”
It is clear that science advances the human condition in a way that cannot even be compared to religion. In fact, I would argue that had religious doctrine not consistently persecuted inquisitive scientists as heretics there would have been a man on the moon 50 to 100 years earlier than it happened. Imagine where we would be today if early scientists could have pursued their discoveries without pressure and threats from organized religion.
Religious issues aside, if you do not “believe” in evolution you are either ignorant or you are dumb. Period. When I say ignorant I do not mean it as an insult, we are all ignorant of some things. I sure am. I simply mean that you do not have the information. It staggers me how often I embark in a conversation on evolution with a creationist or IDer only to find that their arguments and “points” are very easy to address. They are simply uninformed about the extent of the fossil record as well as the predictions made by scientists in terms of transitional fossils and the subsequent discovery of the predicted intermediate forms, for example Archaeopteryx.
The brutal reality is that religions will either embrace the inarguable truth of evolution or risk looking like a group of flat earth denialists, the modern day equivalent of a caveman worshiping a moon god simply because he does not understand what that thing is in the sky.
I like Bill O’Reilly and the very unique role that he plays as a watchdog (unlike the mainstream media who are now lapdogs rather than watchdogs), but he is woefully ignorant of science. It is patently ridiculous that he discards science because it does not clearly explain everything and instead falls back on a 2000+ year old book written by people who knew nothing about science. That is classic gap theism and it is ignorant.