Dawkins on Colbert

[Roboramma]

According to his website (http://richarddawkins.net/) Richard Dawkins is going to be on the Colbert Report this tuesday. :)

I imagine it'll be pretty entertaining.

[ImaginalDisc]

Colbert: Charles Darwin, good scientist or GREAT scientist?

Dawkins: Don't you coustomarily ask guests about President Bush?

Colbert: Yes, but you're Brittish; you hate democracy!

[Ichneumonwasp]

This is gonna be great! I want to see how dawkins responds to the pseudo-right wing/hyper-Christian stance that Colbert is sure to take with him. Hilarity is sure to ensue. I wonder if Colbert will be able to get through his schtick without cracking up.

[Level]

I wonder if Dawkins will jump on Stephen's caricature bandwagon. This doesn't seem like an interview Dawkins would use to actually get his message out there. Hopefully it'll be funny. I'll be watching.

And thanks for the heads up Robo!

[Foster Zygote]

I wonder if Dawkins will jump on Stephen's caricature bandwagon. This doesn't seem like an interview Dawkins would use to actually get his message out there. Hopefully it'll be funny. I'll be watching.

And thanks for the heads up Robo!

I've found that, while Colbert conducts his interviews in character, He's very good at letting the guests get their point across. He's really quite clever about it.

Steven

[Tricky]

I've found that, while Colbert conducts his interviews in character, He's very good at letting the guests get their point across. He's really quite clever about it.Oh yes, in fact, sometimes he puts the punctuation on the point by providing the humorous consequent of the opposite position.

I can't help but wonder what the "Seat of Heat" topic will be.

[Foster Zygote]

Oh yes, in fact, sometimes he puts the punctuation on the point by providing the humorous consequent of the opposite position.

I can't help but wonder what the "Seat of Heat" topic will be.

I don't know. It depends on who the guest is on The Daily Show tomorrow.:)

Steven

[Tricky]

I don't know. It depends on who the guest is on The Daily Show tomorrow.:)
Damn, you're right. I guess I'm not a devoted enough listener to remember that it is Stewart that does the "seat of heat".

(And I have to share my mistyping which I caught, but I'm almost sorry I didn't call it the "seat of head")

[Orangutan]

Damn, you're right. I guess I'm not a devoted enough listener to remember that it is Stewart that does the "seat of heat".

Viewer, it's on the T.V., Your thinking of the wireless again grandpa.
;)

[Tricky]

Viewer, it's on the T.V., Your thinking of the wireless again grandpa.
;)
..-. ..- -.-. -.-
-.-- --- ..-

:boxedin:

[Skeptic]

..-. ..- -.-. -.-
-.-- --- ..-

:boxedin:

That didn't say what I think it said, did it?

(Well, that's one way to get through those obscenity filters...)

[Tricky]

That didn't say what I think it said, did it?

(Well, that's one way to get through those obscenity filters...)
What's that you say, Sonny? Grandma an' me don't no nothin' 'bout no rule-eightin' obscenity filters).

[Level]

Richard says he's nervous about going on the Colbert Report:

Taken from his myspace blog no less.


Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Richard Dawkins Tour Journal Entry: 17th October 2006
I'm in my New York hotel room, rather apprehensive about the Colbert Report this evening. All my American friends go out of their way to tell he is not what he seems: he is playing a character. Well, yes, I understand that. But I don't find it very helpful. How am I actually supposed to deal with him? If he really was a right wing loony I'd know how to handle him. But how do you handle somebody who is only pretending to be a right wing loony, given that he interrupts just like a right wing loony and doesn't let you get a word in edgeways just like a right wing loony? Well, my friends say, just be yourself. Oh fine, that makes it easy, just be yourself! How can you be yourself when you know the other fellow is not being himself?

I've been too busy travelling, to update this journal since Stratford. Travelling a lot. The British tour consisted mostly of readings with Lalla, in London, Cambridge and Birmingham. The tour ended in Cheltenham, with an on-stage conversation with Robert Winston, he of the Groucho Marx moustache and glasses. Throughout, there were lots of interviews with radio, television and newspapers. Those went OK, except that there is a certain sameness about the questions and therefore -- inevitably -- about the answers.

I think the readings went reasonably well, and there were good questions in all three places. The format is the same whenever we do it, and it has been for several books now. Lalla and I read from the book. Then she sits down and I take questions. It seems to work, and people seem to like the two voice formula.

The first event, in London, was the best. Terrific audience, very responsive, lots of laughs. Cambridge was a little stickier. They seemed less ready to laugh, although they were very attentive, and the signing queue was friendly and enthusiastic. Perhaps we were spoiled by the experience the previous night with the London audience. Also there were no microphones in Cambridge. That's OK, we could be heard, but it is a bit more of a strain having to shout, and it means you can't indulge the occasional dramatic whisper, like you can with a good mike. The Birmingham audience was intermediate in responsiveness between London and Cambridge. I was delighted to see Jack Cohen (distinguished biologist and science fiction aficinado) in the signing queue afterwards, and I was immensely chuffed when he compared my style to Peter Medawar's. Great exaggeration, of course, but I am grateful to be so much as MENTIONED in the same sentence as as that great scientific hero.

Cheltenham with Robert Winston was nice. He is a delightful man, warm and friendly, intelligent and articulate. Claims to be religious although, whenever I try to get him to explain, he will talk about morality and rules for living, but never actually talks about whether God exists. Maybe he doesn't really care. Perhaps just being a Jew is what counts for him, rather than bothering about whether God actually exists. I suspect quite a lot of ostensibly religious people are like that. It is something I don't understand. If God existed, it would be the most important fact about the universe. Morals and rules for living are trivial by comparison.

Dinner afterwards in Cheltenham with my British publishers. They are also Robert's publishers, so it was a jolly occasion. The publishers were cock-a-hoop because the God Delusion had just gone straight onto the Sunday Times bestseller list at Number 2 (British publishers regard the Sunday Times list with the same awe as American publishers regard the New York Times list).

Back home for just one day to prepare for my US tour. Then Virgin Atlantic to Washington DC, where I had to change planes for Kansas City. Changing planes was a nightmare. Two hours just isn't enough, given the length of the queue to get through immigration. I made it onto the Kansas plane by the skin of my teeth, and only by dint of PLEADING with unwilling officials at two successive stages to break the rules and lead me, shamefacedly and apologetic, to the head of the line. Then, the last straw, I sprinted to the gate, only to discover that it had just closed. I sprinted to the next gate and pleaded with the man to let me through. He refused at first, but then relented. I was allowed to run across the tarmac and board the plane, with seconds to spare. Amazingly, my luggage made it too. Be warned. Two hours may be enough time to change planes normally. It is NOT enough time when you have to go through Immigration. It was nothing to do with my transatlantic flight being delayed. No, the Virgin flight was on time. You must allow much more than two hours when you are a non-American citizen trying to get through immigration.

Last night was my talk at the University of Kansas at Lawrence. It was not readings, but a lecture with a Keynote presentation. The audience was marvellous. Kansas has been unjustly maligned and traduced. Nearly 2000 people turned up and they were wonderfully enthusiastic, laughing and applauding throughout the lecture, then very good questions afterwards, and they stood to applaud at the end. Where does the myth come from that Kansas is full of religious wingnuts? This was a sophisticated, sceptical, intelligent, educated audience. Just about everybody in the signing queue thanked me for coming and for, implicitly, ignoring Kansas's unjust reputation. If last night was a sample of what the Bible Belt is like, things are much better than I had feared. I came away hugely encouraged. Hands off Kansas. Kansas is OK. No doubt there are religious wingnuts there, and they predictably didn't show up to my lecture. But there are good people there too, and all they need to do is to stand up, recognize each other, and get organized. As I told them last night, Fight the Good Fight.

Richard

blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=119695948&blogID=181591132&MyToken=6ae2f3bf-cde1-4947-a891-f501aa0111a6

[Dunstan]

Just saw it. It was pretty good, though I think Colbert was actually a little too interested, and so played it straighter than he normally does.

[Roboramma]

For those who haven't seen it yet, it's up on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA9EiSJaXww

Not too bad. There were a few good moments. Particularly "And who just did god then?"

[Foster Zygote]

"Everlasting God Stopper." :D

Steven

[RSLancastr]

Perhaps he frequents this forum (there is a user here named EverlastingGodStopper).

[Freethinker]

I've read some of his stuff and seen transcripts of some interviews, but it was the first time I'd seen him on video. He really handles himself well, and comes across as a rational, level-headed guy. I like him a lot.
:bigclap

[Crowbot]

I've read some of his stuff and seen transcripts of some interviews, but it was the first time I'd seen him on video. He really handles himself well, and comes across as a rational, level-headed guy. I like him a lot.
:bigclap

Do a google video or youtube search for something to the effect of "dawkins debate". He's incredibly agile when it comes to debate and just communicating ideas in general.

Unless of course you meant colbert, who operates on a level of sarcasm I will never be able to reach but can only admire from a distance.

[Freethinker]

Do a google video or youtube search for something to the effect of "dawkins debate". He's incredibly agile when it comes to debate and just communicating ideas in general.

Already did. Spent half the day watching him.

[c4ts]

Perhaps he frequents this forum (there is a user here named EverlastingGodStopper).

If Oxford professors have that kind of time...

[EGarrett]

Dawkins is much like Randi...you can read their brilliant writing all-day, but until you actually get to see them in person, you can't really appreciate how charismatic and intelligent they are.

They both also have rapid-fire, hobbit-esque voices that are music to the ear.

[RandFan]

Do a google video or youtube search for something to the effect of "dawkins debate". He's incredibly agile when it comes to debate and just communicating ideas in general.

Unless of course you meant colbert, who operates on a level of sarcasm I will never be able to reach but can only admire from a distance.Oooh...

Ya gotta see root of all evil. I'll quote an old post with a bunch of video links of some of my favorites including the Dawkins videos.



The Root Of All Evil part 1 (Richard Dawkins) (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6690702357039658996&q=richard+dawkins) (50 minutes aprox)
The Root Of All Evil part 2 (Richard Dawkins) (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2439999165547892433&q=richard+dawkins) (47 minutes)

The atheist tapes:
Richard Dawkins (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1838882698431843195&q=the+atheism+tapes)
Colin Mcginn (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9060086530285966191&q=atheism+tapes&hl=en)
Daniel Dennett (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4952552847322482457&q=atheism+tapes&hl=en)
Denys Turner (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5846284938823903798&q=atheism+tapes&hl=en)
Steven Weinberg (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1788472563417238858&q=atheism+tapes&hl=en)

Other favorites of mine.

The Power of Faith (http://www.infidelguy.com/modules.php?name=Video&op=view&video_id=39) (3 minutes)
Atheist (http://www.infidelguy.com/modules.php?name=Video&op=view&video_id=80) (5 minutes)
Who wrote the Bible? (http://www.infidelguy.com/modules.php?name=Video&op=view&video_id=43) (1 hour 40 minutes)

More (http://www.infidelguy.com/modules.php?name=Video&op=videos&list=hottest) are at www.infidelguy.com (http://www.infidelguy.com)

[Elentar]

Wow, these forums are like crack! All the links! I just got here today (even though I registered a long time ago and forgot about it.)

Colbert handled it very well, throwing out satirical versions of the responses that Dawkins usually gets from believers, but he kept them brief and let Dawkins talk. To be honest, I had the same misgivings about Colbert's style that Dawkins did; it does sometimes get in the way of a good interview (but then, even Stewart's jokes sometimes get in the way.) But it worked well, although it's always too brief, with only twelve minutes or so for the interview.

An interesting note on Colbert: he teaches Sunday school, and is a Tolkien freak who played a lot of Dungeons and Dragons when he was young. Can you imagine his Sunday school classes? He probably does it to make sure that the kids don't turn out twisted (the Bible is an awful book to teach kids.)

[Foster Zygote]

Welcome Elentar.

Steven

[mumblethrax]

I thought Dawkins was good, but Colbert was a little weak. He seemed to be having trouble coming up with arguments inane enough to be credibly ID.

[Dark Jaguar]

Colbert: I... lost.

Now that's comedy!

I really wish the interview could have gone on longer though.

Hmm... I wonder... Would the Steven be interested in working with Dawkins as a comedy duo, faking debates to great effect all over the country and (english speaking) parts beyond?

[Dog Boots]

To be honest, I had the same misgivings about Colbert's style that Dawkins did; it does sometimes get in the way of a good interview (but then, even Stewart's jokes sometimes get in the way.)

After all, it is called Comedy Central. I think they've gotten people confused on this point due to their incredible ability to become a power factor in news and media, landing such names as Dawkins and Musharraf, and still manage to be funny. People are beginning to expect them to deliver serious stuff also.

I think this was best illustrated in 2004 when CNN had Jon Stewart as a guest on that Tucker Carlson (-ton?) and whats-his-face -show. If you haven't seen that one, search for it immediately. It's brilliant and amongst other things, it perfectly illustrates this exact point. Stewart suddenly finds himself attacked on the point that The Daily Show isn't inquisitive enough (I think) and rebuts with the classic: (from memory) "I'm on COMEDY CENTRAL, for crying out loud! The show that comes after me is 'PUPPETS MAKING PRANK PHONE CALLS'!!!"

Ah. I'm gonna watch that clip when I get home (I'm on GPRS from a café). It's a classic. See Tucker receive a thorough beating live. :)

[Mephisto]

I've read some of his stuff and seen transcripts of some interviews, but it was the first time I'd seen him on video. He really handles himself well, and comes across as a rational, level-headed guy. I like him a lot.
:bigclap

Ditto here, and I especially liked his reference to Stephen Hawkins. :)

[UserGoogol]

After all, it is called Comedy Central. I think they've gotten people confused on this point due to their incredible ability to become a power factor in news and media, landing such names as Dawkins and Musharraf, and still manage to be funny. People are beginning to expect them to deliver serious stuff also.

To be fair, I think that a lot of Jon Stewart's interviews would be funnier if he was a bit harder hitting. (On the occasions where he's rougher with the interviewee, he is generally funnier, I think.) But of course, if his interviews were more challenging, he'd have trouble getting people to go on the show, and then he'd have to focus on interviewing celebrities again, so it's kind of a Catch-22.

(Colbert's interviews are a bit trickier to discuss, since he has to interview in character, which is a whole new dynamic. I think he hits as good a balance between being a dick and letting people actually say what they want to say.)