IOZ, this one finds your use of "nonentity" offensive, as it suggests that Dawkins' relative fame in comparison to his debating partner makes either or both parties unworthy of making fools of themselves in front of everyone. Dawkins' opponent, and Dawkins, should both have that ability as much as the rest of us; they shouldn't lose their statuses as living entities for doing so or for wanting to do so.
Dawkins is, also, promoting his book and/or persona in front of a compliant media that is searching for a token fool "anti-God" person. He's allowed media time because, like Bachmann or Kucinich, he is a useful strawman; he presents absurd, self-contradicting atheistic faith against absurd biblical faith. He makes a lot of money and fires up his base; his religious opponents make a lot of money and fire up their base; and, neither could do as well without the other. You can't blame the guy arguing with him for trying to do the same.
In that way, he's just a simple man trying to make it in the jungle, and doing a better job of it than most. He already has more major media coverage than you, and of course, Dawkins is way ahead. Reprehensible, perhaps, and part of a reprehensible system, but still an entity. Switch out your arrowheads.