Pharyngula

Posted by: Mystyk | April 8, 2009 11:12 PM

Bill-o the Clown deserves far worse than being heckled. We simply are held back in properly punishing him due to those pesky secular humanist values. Perhaps if we took up religion, so we could justify whatever we wanted...

(This just makes me like Roger Ebert even more.)

Posted by: Feynmaniac | April 8, 2009 11:15 PM

Nice response, Ebert. Two Squeaky the Chicago Mouse boners up!

Posted by: Holbach | April 8, 2009 11:18 PM

O'Reilly the rabid religious moron who pukes ivective at anything rational. Where's your puking god you slime brain?
He should be dismissed with the other pukers, Limbaugh, Donohue and all the other cesspit cretins. They are a plague on all rational humanity. Every time they think they weaken the nation.

Posted by: Kaessa | April 8, 2009 11:33 PM

I love Roger Ebert. Nice commentary.

Posted by: The Tim Channel | April 8, 2009 11:34 PM

Good to see some common sense (re)appearing in the public sphere. Now will somebody shut off his (and the many other dancing elves) because they're making 'news' intolerable to either watch or believe. Replace the lying liars with some new ones we haven't yet figured out so intimately.

Enjoy.

Posted by: Jeff S | April 8, 2009 11:50 PM

Oh man. Ebert is hilarious. O'Reilly is one of the reasons we are such a divided country. I don't understand how people full of such hate and idiocy are given a public stage. He is influential and thats the problem.

Posted by: Aaron | April 8, 2009 11:57 PM

Oh snap.

Bill got served.

Posted by: bassmanpete | April 9, 2009 12:02 AM

As a non-American (Brit living in Australia) I'm not familiar with this chap but he seems to have a lot of anger in him. Maybe he needs some counselling.

Posted by: Gzalzi | April 9, 2009 12:31 AM

Hey guys, you should go to Bill O's official survey and vote "The O'Reilly Factor" as the funniest show on TV. I bet we can do it!

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=7vBrHSVWnzm897pQZ2aW4g_3d_3d

Posted by: Facile Princeps | April 9, 2009 12:33 AM

I never heard of this Bill O'relly guy but he seems to be popular at Fox News ,which is said to be very fair and balanced, so he must be very good.

Posted by: shamwowmytonguehurts | April 9, 2009 1:10 AM

God he is the most disgusting piece of shit on tv. The mouth-foamiest I've ever seen him was when he was screaming at Geraldo that the death of a woman at the hands of an illegal alien drunk driver was good evidence that we have an illegal immigration problem. Not saying we don't, but really, O'Reilly? That's somehow relevant? Oh right, "HE DIDN'T HAVE A RIGHT TO BE HERE!!!!!!"

Die you cunt.

Posted by: H.H. | April 9, 2009 1:34 AM

I said I'll fucking do it live!

Posted by: Rodger T NZ | April 9, 2009 3:10 AM

Obviously there is no camera fast enough to catch Billy O with his mouth shut.

Posted by: pikeamus | April 9, 2009 4:16 AM

'Sup guys, off topic but I have a request. I'm in a fairly heated e-mail exchange over the usefulness of the bible for historical information. So far my opponent has been failing to provide backup for claims like "Everything mentioned in the bible and found by archaeology has proven to be exactly where and as the bible says it should be." but I'd like to show some specific examples of historical claims made by the bible that remain unsupported by archeological evidence where we might expect to have found some.
I seem to remember that there isn't even any evidence that there was a jewish slave class in egypt or any support for the wandering the desert story but I wouldn't like to say this if I'm mis-remembering things.

Posted by: Thrift | April 9, 2009 4:57 AM

Err, I should clarify, that's Old Testament stuff, which in many ways is more relevant than the New because the Old Testament tends to describe events which would be more likely to leave archaeological evidence.

Posted by: pikeamus | April 9, 2009 6:09 AM

Thanks very much Thrift, thats very handy. If there were a reputation system here I would rep you :)

Posted by: Vic | April 9, 2009 9:01 AM

Roger Ebert is getting cooler by the day.

Posted by: Larry | April 9, 2009 9:08 AM

With all due respect to jaffacakes (#9), you haven't see Billy O until he has been set to music:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSUHm8JRYdY&feature=related

That is what the inter-tubes was built for!

Posted by: Ray Ladbury | April 9, 2009 9:52 AM

OK, turn Bill over. I think he's done on this side.

Roger better watch out, or ol' Billdo will sic Faux Security on him.

Posted by: thingsbreak | April 9, 2009 12:56 PM

Was this sarcasm as well?

My recommendation: The admirable Charles Krauthammer.

There are many things I would call Krauthammer, and admirable isn't one of them. Of course, that's all the more damning of O'Reilley, which indeed may have been Ebert's point.

Still, non-conservatives for too long have praised Krauthammer, Will, Brooks, et al. for being slightly less deranged than the Limbaugh brigade even as they have proved themselves to be as ignorant of mainstream science as the others. That it's even possible Ebert might be serious concerns me.

Posted by: yeah | April 9, 2009 2:32 PM

I've always liked Mr. Ebert. Awesome article.

Posted by: Brownian | April 9, 2009 8:24 PM

pikeamus, you might want to consider turning the question back on your opponent. For instance, archeologists have determined that Knossos did exist in Crete; would your interlocutor argue that the Minotaur must have existed also? Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa have also been unearthed by archaeologists; perhaps your Biblical historian will see fit to worship Siva as well as Yahweh. One doesn't even need an archeologist to see the Hawaiian islands exist, therefore the account of Maui hauling them up from the ocean floor with a fishhook must also be true, so you might suggest your friend book a flight to visit the Puʻuhonua o Hōnaunau in case s/he's broken any kapus.