Whereami: "Then you have people googling O'Reilly's education, lol, what a trip. How old are we?" Your comment suggests that somehow it is immature to revisit someone's education. You Ex-JWs do this all the time in checking into the lack of education of the Watchtower leadership. Why is that immature? Farkel noted that O'Reilly is Harvard educated in response to someone alleging that he is stupid. Farkel's response is valid. A stupid person cannot get through college with honors ... especially a university like Harvard. I looked up O'Reilly's background because I wanted to see in what field he is educated. It seemed interesting, and I posted it. Like so many posters, you do not make any real or substantive argument, but you spout mere rhetoric in full false argumentation style ... it is unimpressive and does not inform or add to anything.
BizzyBee: It is obvious that you do not like O'Reilly because of his views ... rather than making a solid presentation of your views and how they have greater merit, you resort to dismissing and belittling someone with whom you disagree. Fox commentators are no worse or better than any other network. I would love to see some example, some basic high school or first year college argument that has substance which would support your assertions. Worst of all, most of the comments by many are against O'Reilly, when in fact it was the atheist who made an ass of himself by asserting that all religion is a scam and that the majority who attend churches are also duped atheists ... he offered no data, no facts, no studies, no sources ... he fell flat on his face. In that segment, it is clearly O'Reilly who was reasonable, and Silverman who made flawed arguments.
Overall assessment: Farkel made a powerful challenge to you two to do some real homework, get some facts, and make solid arguments and learn how to avoid false arguments. Instead you are the ones who resort to silly immature debate ... is that all you can do as ex-JWs? Has not your ex-JW life led you to want to obtain higher education and develop good critical thinking skills? Or, do you even have a clue as to how badly the JW world really crippled your ability to engage in rational discussion?
VM44: You are correct about O'Reilly's use of tides ... I knew what he wanted to accomplish, but he used a poor illustration ... and it is the most detracting part of his side of the debate. Overall, O'Reilly did okay. Silverman is a nut case, even by atheistic standards.