Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins

[IceSage]

Dawkins had no point to stand on when O'Reilly got him to admit that science doesn't have all the answers. No way was Dawkins the clear cut winner.
What did you think of the "The Young Turks" assessment of the debate?

What are you talking about? That is the point. There's nothing wrong with admitting that "science" (which is a term that describes EVERYTHING IN EXISTENCE) does not have all the answers.

In fact, to start an assessment of something, the first thing that comes to mind should always be the statement, "I do not know."

This is why we seek answers.

Nobody has all the answers about anything, period.

I don't, and neither do you.

PS. Just to be clear, the reason why any logical person would start with the statement, "I do not know," is important for 2 reasons:

1) Confirming you do not know, so you can seek out the answer.
2) So you don't make a baseless assumption. (IE. God did it.)