1. Comment #201009 by HourglassMemory on June 28, 2008 at 6:41 pm

That's pretty authentic! Dawkins did a good job!
I wonder how it was to film it...

Other Comments by HourglassMemory

2. Comment #201012 by gobbles on June 28, 2008 at 6:47 pm

as good as this is,
isn't it odd that when thee earth is mysteriously moved across space that they ask advice from a biologist? unless richard plays the role of an astronomer that is

Other Comments by gobbles

3. Comment #201014 by KrisRamJ on June 28, 2008 at 6:50 pm

Ever the voice of reason, even in science fiction!

Other Comments by KrisRamJ

4. Comment #201017 by LaTomate on June 28, 2008 at 7:07 pm

I saw the episode, and was pleasantly surprised!! I wasn't expecting to see the professor on there.

Nice one :)

Other Comments by LaTomate

5. Comment #201018 by Isaksson on June 28, 2008 at 7:09 pm

I just like to say, that Dr. Who is actually turning out to be a farily good TV-series. Oh, and Mr Dawkins.. nicely done indeed.

Other Comments by Isaksson

6. Comment #201019 by toomanytribbles on June 28, 2008 at 7:11 pm

theists (think they) go to heaven -- richard dawkins goes everywhere.

Other Comments by toomanytribbles

7. Comment #201020 by evirus on June 28, 2008 at 7:16 pm

I'm literally watching it right now, paused it went to this site, big surprise!

Other Comments by evirus

8. Comment #201026 by MarbleMad on June 28, 2008 at 7:35 pm

>isn't it odd that when thee earth is mysteriously >moved across space that they ask advice from a >biologist?

I'm guessing the daleks exterminated all the astronomer first for fear they figure out what was going on. Poor Patrick Moore :(

Other Comments by MarbleMad

9. Comment #201029 by Dean on June 28, 2008 at 7:54 pm

>isn't it odd that when thee earth is mysteriously >moved across space that they ask advice from a >biologist?

He was probably required to counter religious explanations for the moving of the Earth.

Other Comments by Dean

10. Comment #201030 by theIdiot on June 28, 2008 at 7:54 pm

Dawkins may be a brilliant scientist, but he sure is an awful actor.

Other Comments by theIdiot

11. Comment #201031 by Stephen Maxwell on June 28, 2008 at 8:08 pm

Haha, theIdiot. I beg to differ! I refer you to this piece of award-worthy footage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ThQQuHtzHM

Other Comments by Stephen Maxwell

12. Comment #201032 by theIdiot on June 28, 2008 at 8:15 pm

Ah, ok he was little better in that video, but he's pretty bad in Dr. Who! Thats was a tomato tossing performance.

Other Comments by theIdiot

13. Comment #201033 by dragonfirematrix on June 28, 2008 at 8:19 pm

Yes, we do travel through space, and like as we traveling in our cars around the country, we find all kinds of new stuff, so lets get out there, find it, learn it, and teach the truth.

THERE IS NO GOD!

Other Comments by dragonfirematrix

14. Comment #201035 by Stephen Maxwell on June 28, 2008 at 8:21 pm

Well, I don't know how intentional it was. The newscaster seemed pretty bad too. It seemed deliberately over the top and camp. :P

Other Comments by Stephen Maxwell

15. Comment #201037 by Laith on June 28, 2008 at 8:27 pm

Here is a youtube copy of the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZb3GDSbPts

Other Comments by Laith

16. Comment #201044 by ruddystargazer on June 28, 2008 at 9:13 pm

Just when I thought he couldn't get any cooler...well, there he goes! ^_^

Other Comments by ruddystargazer

17. Comment #201049 by Atticus_of_Amber on June 28, 2008 at 9:33 pm

I don't know why people are saying RD's "acting' was "bad" here.

It seems to me he wasn't "acting" at all. He seemed to me to behave exactly as I would expect him to if the events portrayed had really happened: he looked at the evidence, saw where it takes him, and then get got little annoyed at people who refused to accept the obvious conclusions. A pure, genuine Dawkins reaction, as far as I can tell.

Bravo I say.

Other Comments by Atticus_of_Amber

18. Comment #201051 by Veon on June 28, 2008 at 9:52 pm

Surely Richard would be the first to go to as he holds the chair for the public understanding of science.

EDIT: And for those complaining about the acting. Watch a few episodes of Dr. Who and you'll see that the clip is in keeping with the style of the show.

Other Comments by Veon

19. Comment #201053 by oriole on June 28, 2008 at 9:55 pm

I thought Richard's acting was spot on. He was speaking in a didactic, professorial style, exactly as he would have done if an interviewer had asked him, say, to respond to Behe. This wasn't true dialogue - he was playing the role of a professor making a public statement.

Other Comments by oriole

20. Comment #201056 by Thor on June 28, 2008 at 10:08 pm

@Stephen Maxwell:

not only Dawkins and the anchor. From what I have seen so far (about 2 episodes of Dr. Who - I am not from the Anglosphere so I wasn't familar with the show until recently) the whole show and all the actors seem "deliberately over the top and camp".

It's not necessarily atrocious, but I don't quite get what people find so appealing about Doctor Who. It exudes has the atmosphere and feeling of some trashy sixties sci-fi series - bad costumes, absurd plot, ham-fisted acting - which is apparently when the show was originally developed, so no surprise there.

Just a matter of individual tast, I guess...

Other Comments by Thor

21. Comment #201058 by robotaholic on June 28, 2008 at 10:25 pm

oh I want Richard Dawkins to star in a movie reply to Expelled! - it would kick ass

Other Comments by robotaholic

22. Comment #201066 by Roy_H on June 28, 2008 at 11:12 pm

Perhaps they asked a real astronomer such as Patrick Moore or Heather Couper but they would not do it!

Other Comments by Roy_H

23. Comment #201072 by Barry Pearson on June 29, 2008 at 12:09 am

#201066 by Roy_H: Perhaps they asked a real astronomer such as Patrick Moore or Heather Couper but they would not do it!

Hm! Normally people queue up to get into Doctor Who.

(They always claim "my children would never forgive me if I passed up the chance").

Other Comments by Barry Pearson

24. Comment #201085 by suffolkthinker on June 29, 2008 at 1:28 am

I thought it was a fun insert and typical of the programme. As for those who wonder why him: perhaps the fact his wife played a former companion to the Doctor has something to do with it? I seem to remember they were introduced by Douglas Adams who had also worked on the show and knew Layla from it. Sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong there.

Other Comments by suffolkthinker

25. Comment #201087 by JazzX on June 29, 2008 at 1:37 am

I think his bad acting is a good thing - it means his on-stage persona is exactly like he is. He really does believe what he's saying, it's not just an act as some uncomplimentary theists are claiming.

I just liked the way they made him state as "empirical fact" that the Earth had moved.

This is probably what the real Dawkins would have said in such circumstances:

"well - I'm a biologist, so this isn't really my field, but the evidence we have .. (and indeed most of the astronomers and physicists I've talked to say this)...shows that the constellations are completely different, yet consistent with the stars relative distance from each other. We've moved to another location in the universe and it's the business of science to find out how and why that has happened. But if you want more detail than that you'll have to ask a physicist or an astronomer ... sorry to be so vague.."

Other Comments by JazzX

26. Comment #201088 by mordacious1 on June 29, 2008 at 1:40 am

I'm sure they wanted someone that everyone would recognize as a real scientist. They could have put a cosmologist in the spot, and it would've made more sense, but not be as funny.

Other Comments by mordacious1

27. Comment #201094 by Enlightenme.. on June 29, 2008 at 2:31 am

^^JazzX: "This is probably what the real Dawkins would have said in such circumstances"...

I said it in my mind in Richard's voice, and it sounded spot on, well done jazzx.

[off-topic]Whoa, its just come on the news, we now have a new CofE (with reinvigorated gayhate) announced today.
Perhaps I should consider joining as I was christened, and I've always fancied owning a couple of slaves.

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

28. Comment #201096 by Jamie Walton on June 29, 2008 at 2:45 am

I'm not a regular watcher of Dr who, The last time I watched it was to see Kylie in a maids outfit a few months ago.

Anyway, Richards appearence was terrific, The acting was fine. From that reading I believed it was the 50ith time that day he had been asked the same damn question by some TV interviewer and he's sick of explaining it. Much like he know reacts when asked about Stalin and Hitler. Good job.

Other Comments by Jamie Walton

29. Comment #201103 by BillySands on June 29, 2008 at 3:26 am

Was nice to see Richard on Dr Who last night. I wonder if David Robertson has asked for his autograph yet.

I wonder why they have not made DR a villan on the series. Perhaps his inanity and desire to lead and assimilate everyone into his evil cult is too OTT and unbelievable for a programe that made a vilan out of liquorice allsorts.

Other Comments by BillySands

30. Comment #201105 by Matt H. on June 29, 2008 at 3:31 am

I would have thought the event of Earth moving across space would demand input from an astronomer or physicist, not a biologist (though an excellent biologist he is all the same).

Other Comments by Matt H.

31. Comment #201109 by Barbara on June 29, 2008 at 3:54 am

I liked it. Richard spoke his lines convincingly. Good performance!

Other Comments by Barbara

32. Comment #201113 by Carole on June 29, 2008 at 4:22 am

I read the title of this thread too quickly, and I picked up the "on" as an "is".

Actually, on reflection, I'd like to suggest that for Richard's next job, when he retires from the Charles Simonyi post. :)

Other Comments by Carole

33. Comment #201116 by the great teapot on June 29, 2008 at 4:56 am

That just about sums up Doctor Who and BBC1-
What a waste of an opportunity.
Hey , we've got Richard Dawkins lined up, what words shall we get him to say...
Utter garbage. Still if you are competing with deal or no deal you have to pull out all the stops.

Other Comments by the great teapot

34. Comment #201120 by MartinSGill on June 29, 2008 at 5:06 am

RD was on Doctor who because the producer, Russel T Davis, is a huge fan of Dawkins and not the only one, it seems.

Davis Remarked: "People were falling at his feet ... We've had Kylie Minogue on that set, but it was Dawkins people were worshipping."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/russell-t-davies-return-of-the-tea-time-lord-805255.html

Now both RD and his wife have had parts in Doctor Who I still prefer Lalla though. :)

She still does the occasional Big Finish Doctor Who audio play and she's great in those to.

Other Comments by MartinSGill

35. Comment #201121 by HappyPrimate on June 29, 2008 at 5:10 am

Although this clip was out of context, it appears to be a stellar performance. I look forward to seeing the entire episode next year as we in the U.S. get the series about a year later than the UK. Those who do not or cannot appreciate the Doctor Who series, old or new, are missing a fun excercise is abstract thinking. It is pure fun and in my opinion, a very well done program. I have seen every episode of the old and new series several times. I very much enjoy the stretch of imagination it provides and a brief rest from reality. Of course there are also very good moral lessons to be learned from the shows much like what the writers of all the Star Trek shows put in every episode. Certainly a better source of moral teachings than certain 2,000 year old books.

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

36. Comment #201122 by Three of Nineteen on June 29, 2008 at 5:13 am

Well Richard is pretty well known as a scientist and voice of reason so he was a good pick. I can't, off the top of my head, think of an astronomer with a clout as Richard to fill the role.
Also remember who Richard is married to:
Lalla Ward, who used to play the Doctor's assistant Romana AND used to be married to Tom Baker, the fourth Doctor.
That might have played a little part in him getting the role.
But even without the family connection, like I said I can't think of someone else except maybe Stephen Hawking to do that scene.

Other Comments by Three of Nineteen

37. Comment #201124 by the great teapot on June 29, 2008 at 5:18 am

Patrick Moore would have been more appropriate.

Or Russell Grant:)

Other Comments by the great teapot

38. Comment #201128 by LeroiJones on June 29, 2008 at 5:27 am

It's two of my favourite things all rolled into one! Apparently Russell T Davies is a big Dawkins fan which is why he was asked I think. A good friend of mine who sadly died in February was the biggest Dr Who fan I've ever known and he was also a big Dawkins supporter. I feel a bit sad that he missed this because it would have made his day. He always felt that the ideas and drive behind Dr Who was very similar to the Dawkins view point. I have to say I agree with him. I think there are many themes to do with science, evidence, learning, humanism etc. I wonder if the good prof agrees with this?

Something else my friend used to say was that Dr Who was originally developed to educate children about science and history.

Fabulous stuff!

Other Comments by LeroiJones

39. Comment #201138 by radagast7 on June 29, 2008 at 6:37 am

What is the difference between a cyberman and a clergyman? One is a mindless robot that tries to turn the whole of humanity into copies of itself, the other is a character from Dr. Who.

Other Comments by radagast7

40. Comment #201139 by Stephen Maxwell on June 29, 2008 at 6:37 am

@ Thor.

I wasn't criticising or anything. I intended to say something along the lines of what Veon said, that his performance is in keeping with the style of the show.

Other Comments by Stephen Maxwell

41. Comment #201158 by Scarthin Nick on June 29, 2008 at 8:32 am

What's all this about acting? Everybody knows Dr. Who is a real-life, fly on the wall, documentary. My goodness me, you'll be saying Buffy the Vampire Slayer is fiction next.

Other Comments by Scarthin Nick

42. Comment #201160 by Hal in Howell on June 29, 2008 at 9:12 am

Very, very neat. Everyone's a critic, but for a 12 second sound bite, RD was fab! Looked and acted like he was the real RD.

Other Comments by Hal in Howell

43. Comment #201162 by springsfromsalt on June 29, 2008 at 9:35 am

Richard did a great job. The only other person I think could have done it would be Neil Degrasse Tyson.
It's his field of expertise but I'm not sure if he is really well known in the UK...

Other Comments by springsfromsalt

44. Comment #201170 by Rufus08 on June 29, 2008 at 10:33 am

"It seemed deliberately over the top and camp." I think the new doctor who is very OTT and camp. The only one I have seen was the second half of last nights and I almost cheered when that incarnation of the doctor died. David Tennant gets right up my nose.

Other Comments by Rufus08

45. Comment #201171 by Border Collie on June 29, 2008 at 10:35 am

My oh my, so some of you think RD is a bad actor? I'd say considering some of the stupid f'ing questions asked of him and his typically civil responses, I'd say he's a very good actor. And besides, he can't hold a candle to Chuck Norris when it comes to bad acting.

Other Comments by Border Collie

46. Comment #201188 by Vaal on June 29, 2008 at 11:50 am

They should have had Alistair McGrath on trying to explain how the Earth had moved..

"Well, I would like to say that the possibility of the Earth being in a transcendental state may be in fact not be real as perceived by the mind but in reality may, if I am allowed to conceptualize, perhaps that there may be no good reason to believe that we have moved at all, unless I can raise the point that absolute and truth may not in actual fact be in the sphere of reality, but of course, I am not able to speculate about truth as it is out of the realm of consciousness, as I perceive it, and as I am able to understand it. Oh, I used to be atheist you know. More Peas, please Dear".

Or David Robertson... "Goddidit", atheist fundamentalist fascists! Where's my cheque book?

Edit: Sorry, Terabrat, couldn't help it :-)

Other Comments by Vaal

47. Comment #201189 by MorituriMax on June 29, 2008 at 11:52 am

I would rather have seen Michio Kaku, but since they didn't use him, Richard was the next best choice.. bravo! Encore!

Other Comments by MorituriMax

48. Comment #201202 by Colonel Molerat on June 29, 2008 at 12:22 pm

Was this his entire performance? Just wondering whether I should watch the rest of the episode or not (I'm not a fan of the new Dr Who, though I must confess, I've only seen about three episodes, if that.)

JazzX - Yes, I noticed that 'empirical' thing - do you think he was deliberately playing up to the slightly over-the-top emphasis on rationality he's caricatured as having (a caricature which is an obvious response in a world where so many people have none)?

PS - I don't think his acting was bad, he just looked like he was responding, with a bit of frustration, to an interviewer.
I'll like him even more if he indulges in a bit of self-deprecation/humour!

Other Comments by Colonel Molerat

49. Comment #201242 by Rational_G on June 29, 2008 at 1:20 pm

I know I'll get a lot of flack for this but:

Suggest renaming the series: "Doctor What the Fuck For?"

Other Comments by Rational_G

50. Comment #201263 by Isaksson on June 29, 2008 at 2:08 pm

Well, this is not a reply to any specific person, but just my line of thought on the matter of preference.

Yes, Dr. Who is most certanly a B-series, with B-acting and for the most part, but not allways, made up from B-scripts.

Yes, in that regard, Mr Dawkins is a B-rated actor if he is to be considered an actor at all, as he, atleast in my opinion, does just as good as anyone else on Dr. Who.

With this in mind, I whole heartadly think Dr. Who is turning out to be a good series. Im so utterly fed up with reality shows that aren't more real than santa. Not to mention that I dont even want to hear about that bloody Britney Spears and her babies, boyfriends and what not she have, or have not, problems with. The same goes for Most of the news broadcasts out there. If you put on a tape, recorded in the 80:ies, its just the same as now, just different places, dates and different people, but the same killings, sports and weather as we always have had.

Its so rare to find something that is as reliable as an old B-series, and that does not have any other agenda than to entertain you.

Other Comments by Isaksson