I can have little or no knowledge of the internal process while only observing the outcome

To assess the outcome you would need to know the context in which the paragraph stands. You would need to listen to the speech. Having a high confidence that a 37 words excerpt is enough to judge the quality of someone's thinking is a reasoning error.

I agree that that's true in general, but on the other hand, when someone gives a weak argument for theism

If I read through the writings and speeches of Richard Dawkins I am highly confident that I can find a short paragraph were Dawkins makes a weak argument against theism. That's no proof that Dawkins has a naive conception of the debate about theism.

The words that follow "they cry" in the speech are "now seriously". He verbally tagged it as a joke. Making a bad joke isn't proof of a naive conception of an issue.