Richard Dawkins VS Archbishop George Pell

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

The host wasn't, but if you didn't think the audience was biased you must of been watching a different video to me.

Interesting you should say that. I posted the clip without comment because I DID comment on another forum,with what I thought was a relatively objective view and was pilloried .

I seem to remember some rather petulant questions from some apparent theists in the audience:

THIS is what I saw: At the beginning,Dawkins not come across well. The lurid tie and tacky suit vs Pell's dignified black. At times Dawkins seemed a bit shrill and visibly upset. Pell maintained a calm arrogance.

At first, I was surprised at how well Pell came across,he seemed quite intelligent ,especially when arguing about the concept of nothing. Having admitted he is not a physicist,(and does not really understand) Dawkins should have shut up,instead of arguing from ignorance.

Pell scored there,but went downhill pretty much immediately, there,looking increasingly arrogant,, dogmatic and rather ignorant (but not stupid) as Dawkins handed him his head..


I'm still an atheist and still think George Pell is slimy.

---

One of the tweets said that Dawkins comes off as arrogant, but I thought that the Archbishop was a much bigger pompous ass.

True,but tu quoque.