If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Marco Rubio, shining star of The New Improved Modern GOP, thinks the age of the Earth is "one of the great mysteries"   (livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 622
    More: Sad, Marco Rubio, GOP  
•       •       •

3984 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Nov 2012 at 2:07 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



622 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-19 04:12:16 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Pharque-it: These idiots do not even know when their idol, Jesus, was born. Neither day nor year.

December 25, 0

suck on that!

Soometime in summer, 35BC.

how the fark is there snow on the manger in summertime in the middle east?

Why are shepherds out in the fields with their flocks on a friged winter night?

because God hired them as extras to fill out the Nativity scene

Yes, by sending an angel too them to tell them to leg it over their. An angel which found them in their fields.


It was an unusually warm December night
 
2012-11-19 04:13:07 PM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Now you're lying. Your argument has not been "deferring to experts is good." Your argument has been that "deferring to experts is good" is Rubio's position.


Fair enough.

MindfulModeration: Rubio: "I dunno, ask a scientist or a priest, either of them is just as good."

The thread: "But that's wrong, you farking retard."

You: "Marco Rubio never said that. Here is the actual quote."

The rest of the thread: "Derp-derp-doo."


Yeah, that's a decent summary.
 
2012-11-19 04:13:28 PM

qorkfiend: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Pharque-it: These idiots do not even know when their idol, Jesus, was born. Neither day nor year.

December 25, 0

suck on that!

Soometime in summer, 35BC.

how the fark is there snow on the manger in summertime in the middle east?

That's a dispute among theologians.


I don't think that there's any dispute that Jesus's birthday was celebrated in April for the first few hundred years. Until the need arose to co-opt the solstice party the pagans threw every year.

Even the Catholics readily admit that: Catholic.com
 
2012-11-19 04:14:49 PM

lennavan: I was hoping no one would catch that one. This of course requires a discussion about how not all scientists are the same. You wouldn't ask a Chemist about evolution.


Imagine you were giving a job interview to a Chemist, and you asked him what his favorite programming language was for doing numerical simulations. And suppose he answered:
Boy, that's a real good question. Some people are really starting to like the Python package NumPy for that type of thing, but I personally just like to use the Bible. Now, I don't know if Python or the Bible are better for doing numerical simulations, but I think people should be allowed to teach their children to use both. If you want to know which one is better, maybe you should ask a theologian.
Would you hire that chemist? What if it turned out later that job you were hiring him or her for ultimately involved no numerical simulations of any kind, so the question wasn't really pertinent to the job? Would you hire that chemist then?
 
2012-11-19 04:14:52 PM

skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Pharque-it: These idiots do not even know when their idol, Jesus, was born. Neither day nor year.

December 25, 0

suck on that!

Soometime in summer, 35BC.

how the fark is there snow on the manger in summertime in the middle east?

Why are shepherds out in the fields with their flocks on a friged winter night?

because God hired them as extras to fill out the Nativity scene

Yes, by sending an angel too them to tell them to leg it over their. An angel which found them in their fields.

It was an unusually warm December night


You talk in circles good sir!

Whence cometh your snow on this warm December?
 
2012-11-19 04:14:59 PM

skullkrusher: Bacontastesgood: skullkrusher: please, he's an amateur.

LOL well played.

I just make my skullkrusher alt a whole shiatload smarter than my lennavan one


That's funny.

/I amuse myself.
 
2012-11-19 04:15:05 PM

lennavan: Anti_illuminati: lennavan: I can't find a single portion of his statement I disagree with.

"Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries."

You do not disagree with this statement?

I think figuring out how existence came to be is one of the great mysteries. I of course did not read this as "7 days or 7 eras are the only two possibilities."


"Existance" and "the creation of the Earth" are not synonyms you puerile cretin.

And the relative time frame for when both of those events occurred is not particularly mysterious.

/Christ, I bit hard. Time to step away from the computer.
 
2012-11-19 04:15:39 PM

asmodeus224: Tricky Chicken: Actually, it is a very valid theological question. If your god is all powerful, then he can easily manipulate the way objects are percieved over time. He could manipulate time in any way he wished. If you accept the dogma of your church when they tell you the Earth if 5,000 years old then that is a purely acceptable theological position. If a god can create a universe, he can alter the ratios of C-12 and C-14 in any way he chooses.

One bit of a problem with that logic (such as it is)...most religions assert their God is good. Especially Christians...such trickery for no other purpose other than to sow doubt would not be 'good'? No?

Can a trickster really be considered good? how can such a god trick his creation (humanity) into believing in such things as time and dating etc and then condemn the same to hell for believing the 'false' clues that the god put there to trick them in the first place?

That god sounds like a total douchenozzle.


That is a different argument altogether. If you look at the concept of Satan, you find that for some reason he wants to collect souls. His major challenge would be deathbed repentance. What good would it be to corrupt a guy for so long only to lose him at the last second? He needs to get you to sin in such a way that you think it is a virtue and you are proud of your sin. He needs to get sin into the bible as a virtue. Now any god with half a brain would be able to predict that some people will eventually get isolated from the general population. He would give them a built in way to know if something is right or wrong. When you do something that is wrong, you naturally feel bad about it. The Bible does not predict the development of the internet, but you automatically know that writing a virus that makes porn immages show up on a childs screen is wrong.

But the first two moral statements in the Bible are 1. It is good go procreate the species "Be fruitful and multiply", and 2. It is wrong to know right from wrong on your own "Don't eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil."

What god would ever come up with that second one and why so early in the Bible? It is clearly in there to preclude you from making a judgement on your own about any of the other sins that were snuck in there later. Things like killing homosexuals, and making women marry their rapists.

If Satan didn't write the bible, he surely deserves an editorial credit.
 
2012-11-19 04:16:03 PM
Can't we all agree that Rubio is a pandering little shiat who saw fit to bring up the Bible in a response about the age of the Earth, and therefore is not qualified to be President of anything, so I can stop hearing about his stupid ass? Seriously.
 
2012-11-19 04:16:04 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Pharque-it: These idiots do not even know when their idol, Jesus, was born. Neither day nor year.

December 25, 0

suck on that!

Soometime in summer, 35BC.

how the fark is there snow on the manger in summertime in the middle east?

Why are shepherds out in the fields with their flocks on a friged winter night?

because God hired them as extras to fill out the Nativity scene

Yes, by sending an angel too them to tell them to leg it over their. An angel which found them in their fields.

It was an unusually warm December night

You talk in circles good sir!

Whence cometh your snow on this warm December?


Hopefully from the sky
 
2012-11-19 04:16:33 PM

Leeds: qorkfiend: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Pharque-it: These idiots do not even know when their idol, Jesus, was born. Neither day nor year.

December 25, 0

suck on that!

Soometime in summer, 35BC.

how the fark is there snow on the manger in summertime in the middle east?

That's a dispute among theologians.

I don't think that there's any dispute that Jesus's birthday was celebrated in April for the first few hundred years. Until the need arose to co-opt the solstice party the pagans threw every year.

Even the Catholics readily admit that: Catholic.com


I'm not a theologist, man. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on when Jesus was born and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether Jesus was born April, or December, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.
 
2012-11-19 04:17:27 PM

qorkfiend: You wouldn't expect a chemist to understand the basic principles of evolution? Why not?


A chemist, yes, the same math informs the basis of chemistry (though it's really the other way, modern evolutionary theory is more of an application of the principles of chemistry to an ecological system).

Wouldn't expect, say, a psychologist to know more than the grade-school version, though. Or a geologist. Less crossover, there. They'd probably just write directions to the biology department on a bit of paper and hand it to you. Or possibly the library.
 
2012-11-19 04:18:48 PM
I like to imagine that this transpired with the reporter and Rubio somewhere near a private space. And the reporter asked the question, thumb on his recorder, and Rubio gave him this look.

"You mind, son? Just for a minute." He says, gesturing to the thumb. Understanding, the rporter raises his thumb just a bit, and just like that, they're off the record.

"I know what you're asking. You know what you're asking. And you're right. It's damn terrible, just terrible, that this is the kind of question that influences politics. I know! You're not - just sit. Listen. There are three hundred million people in this country, and roughly half of them aren't comfortable with the world they've come to live in. I'm a Cuban with ambitions of going places some day - but the second I answer that question with a fact, you know, you know that I might as well plan on running for President with a D after my name. So. In a few seconds, you're going to put your thumb back and I'm going to say something that makes me look like an idiot. Better that someone who isn't willing to say stands on the Science committee than someone who genuinely doesn't farking know, right? Now... you can start recording again. Time for you to make me look stupid and act proud of yourself."

But that's giving everyone involved too much credit.
 
2012-11-19 04:18:52 PM

qorkfiend: Leeds: qorkfiend: skullkrusher: Holocaust Agnostic: skullkrusher: Pharque-it: These idiots do not even know when their idol, Jesus, was born. Neither day nor year.

December 25, 0

suck on that!

Soometime in summer, 35BC.

how the fark is there snow on the manger in summertime in the middle east?

That's a dispute among theologians.

I don't think that there's any dispute that Jesus's birthday was celebrated in April for the first few hundred years. Until the need arose to co-opt the solstice party the pagans threw every year.

Even the Catholics readily admit that: Catholic.com

I'm not a theologist, man. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on when Jesus was born and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether Jesus was born April, or December, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.


Your response was eloquent and appropriate. +10 :)
 
2012-11-19 04:19:03 PM

GAT_00: So much for Rubio claiming he wanted to move the GOP away from social values. You're just as bad as Huckabee. At least he's honest that he thinks Jebus made the planet and that's why he should be President. You claim to disavow these people yet you still play lip service to them, 4 years out from the next election! You're not changing a damn thing, you're still the problem.

Not that I expected anything else. The next GOP nominee will be even further to the right than Romney was, probably will openly run on the 47% bullshiat.


Truthiness. My hardcore Republican friend was just extolling the values of the GOP's "young guns" to me this weekend. I'm sure he'll get a kick out of this article (read: make a feeble excuse for Rubio, such as "Why does this matter? It's a 'gotcha' question!")
 
2012-11-19 04:19:12 PM
Sometimes, you gotta ask yourselves, did Fark really need 450 posts about this? Granted, many of them are "TEH LULZ" posts, but again, 450? Dayum.

//6,016, obviously. Wake up, sheeple.
 
2012-11-19 04:19:48 PM
Another GOP politician denying science? Hey, GOP...

www.sadanduseless.com
 
2012-11-19 04:20:14 PM

qorkfiend: I'm not a theologist, man. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on when Jesus was born and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether Jesus was born April, or December, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.


I find this to be the most outrageous comment ever.
 
2012-11-19 04:20:23 PM

MindfulModeration: "Existance" and "the creation of the Earth" are not synonyms you puerile cretin.


The word "cretin" is pathetically underused.
 
2012-11-19 04:20:28 PM

lennavan: I was hoping no one would catch that one. This of course requires a discussion about how not all scientists are the same. You wouldn't ask a Chemist about evolution.


I wouldn't ask a chemist specific questions about cladistics or the Lotka-Volterra equation for example, but I if someone told me he was a chemist and then said he didn't know what evolution was, I'd have good reason to doubt he was a chemist.

I understand that in graduate school you learn more and more about less and less, but there is some basic science knowledge that nearly everyone should have learned by middle school, and probably reinforced both in high school and possible as an undergraduate. And the kids most likely to pick that science up are the ones excited about science who go on to become scientists, a career field that discourages more casual pursuit of the subject by it's high entry bar and low pay compared to education achievement.

So yeah, there are undoubtedly some scientists who totally fail in unrelated fields, but I'm pretty sure that is the exception rather than the rule, that actually most scientists can answer casual science questions whether it is in their field or not.
 
2012-11-19 04:20:53 PM

Jim_Callahan: qorkfiend: You wouldn't expect a chemist to understand the basic principles of evolution? Why not?

A chemist, yes, the same math informs the basis of chemistry (though it's really the other way, modern evolutionary theory is more of an application of the principles of chemistry to an ecological system).

Wouldn't expect, say, a psychologist to know more than the grade-school version, though. Or a geologist. Less crossover, there. They'd probably just write directions to the biology department on a bit of paper and hand it to you. Or possibly the library.


I would think the geologist would have pretty detailed knowledge of evolution since there are geological layers that were produced of biological elements at various points in the evolutionary cycle.
 
2012-11-19 04:21:01 PM
I GAVE YOU HUMANS THE ABILITY TO THINK INDEPENDENTLY OF ME FOR A REASON!!

USE YOUR MINDS!!

YOU DARE TO INSULT YOUR CREATOR BY SLAMMING SHUT THE DOORS OF INQUIRY?

-- God
 
2012-11-19 04:21:03 PM
I shudder to think what Rubio's answer would have been if he were asked to name the president of Uzbekistan.
 
2012-11-19 04:21:12 PM

GoldSpider: MindfulModeration: "Existance" and "the creation of the Earth" are not synonyms you puerile cretin.

The word "cretin" is pathetically underused.


especially in such lulzy fashion
 
2012-11-19 04:21:22 PM

dahmers love zombie: This thread is seriously dildos.

Seriously.
Dildos.

 
2012-11-19 04:21:27 PM

GoldSpider: MindfulModeration: "Existance" and "the creation of the Earth" are not synonyms you puerile cretin.

The word "cretin" is pathetically underused.


And sadly, the misspelling, "Existance" is overused.

I has a sad.
 
2012-11-19 04:22:32 PM

Rann Xerox: I shudder to think what Rubio's answer would have been if he were asked to name the president of Uzbekistan.


That question would be beki beki beki hard for him to answer.
 
2012-11-19 04:23:12 PM

abb3w: dwrash: Our current estimate is based on the assumption that the rate of nuclear decay and the speed of light have always been constant... back to what 4.2 billion years?.. so we are basically taking say an observation of 2.3244e-9% of the timespan and saying that is good enough.

Actually, inaccurate; see CF210.

(Also, it's closer to 4.54 gigayears, but that's not too critical.)

master_dman: The only true answer is that we don't really know. We have a pretty good idea

With better than 95% confidence that its within 1% of the correct value. Which is a far cry from "we don't really know".


static.cdn-seekingalpha.com
 
2012-11-19 04:23:42 PM

lennavan: Anti_illuminati: lennavan: I can't find a single portion of his statement I disagree with.

"Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries."

You do not disagree with this statement?

I think figuring out how existence came to be is one of the great mysteries. I of course did not read this as "7 days or 7 eras are the only two possibilities."


What? He was clearly contrasting the two positions on the table - theological and scientific. What type of mental acrobatics are you using? This isn't "existence", this is the creation of the earth and its duration.
 
2012-11-19 04:24:19 PM

skullkrusher: GoldSpider: MindfulModeration: "Existance" and "the creation of the Earth" are not synonyms you puerile cretin.

The word "cretin" is pathetically underused.

especially in such lulzy fashion


No kidding. That'll farking teach me to think I'm better than auto-correct.
 
2012-11-19 04:24:22 PM

Gwyrddu: I wouldn't ask a chemist specific questions about cladistics or the Lotka-Volterra equation for example, but I if someone told me he was a chemist and then said he didn't know what evolution was, I'd have good reason to doubt he was a chemist.


What if he didn't know how old the Earth was off the top of his head?

Gwyrddu: So yeah, there are undoubtedly some scientists who totally fail in unrelated fields, but I'm pretty sure that is the exception rather than the rule, that actually most scientists can answer casual science questions whether it is in their field or not.


Quite the contrary. Scientists who can cross disciplines are the exception to the rule. They are the ones who go on to do truly great work.
 
2012-11-19 04:24:51 PM

lennavan: I'm struggling to see the poutrage here. I can't find a single portion of his statement I disagree with. Indeed, I wish all politicians echoed this exact sentiment.


Maybe because some of us think that it would be nice if our elected officials could at least display a grade-school level of basic knowledge about the world around them when "challenged" with deep material like this.

I mean... if he doesn't know the exact answer that's fine, I'm sure most people don't. But to not even be able to say something generic like "a few billion years" and then to follow it up with the "great mystery" bit just exposes a very, very deep well of ignorance.
 
2012-11-19 04:24:57 PM
maybe he just recognized it as a gotcha type question and didn't feel like playing that little game.
 
2012-11-19 04:25:49 PM

lennavan: So if I follow - I have been arguing one thing all along and people are hammering me on something else.


Yes you are arguing he only said "I don't know I am not a scientist" BUT THAT'S NOT THE ONLY THING HE SAID!!


You are misrepresenting what he said. this has been explained to you multiple times and you keep ignoring it because it shows you are being an idiot.
 
2012-11-19 04:25:54 PM
Mluh mluh mluh

Don't talk science with people who don't believe in it.
 
2012-11-19 04:27:30 PM

colon_pow: maybe he just recognized it as a gotcha type question and didn't feel like playing that little game.


It's not a "gotcha" question if the answer can expose you either as (a) a scientifically-literate thinking person or (b) a religious whackjob.

For a politican, this is a relevant dichotomy.
 
2012-11-19 04:27:40 PM

lordjupiter: Mluh mluh mluh

Don't talk science with people who don't believe in it.


myscriptx.com
 
2012-11-19 04:27:50 PM

colon_pow: maybe he just recognized it as a gotcha type question and didn't feel like playing that little game.


Please tell me that's sarcasm. "Gotcha" questions are things like "have you stopped beating your wife?", not questions like "do you have a basic mastery of high-school geology?"
 
2012-11-19 04:28:24 PM

Corvus: lennavan: So if I follow - I have been arguing one thing all along and people are hammering me on something else.

Yes you are arguing he only said "I don't know I am not a scientist" BUT THAT'S NOT THE ONLY THING HE SAID!!


You are misrepresenting what he said. this has been explained to you multiple times and you keep ignoring it because it shows you are being an idiot.


That's because he's been trolling this thread for over 400 posts now.

But I bet you know that.

*Golf clap*; nicely done. Extra points for the fact that there's no loss of outrage 400 posts in. Even more extra points for sticking with it.
 
2012-11-19 04:28:24 PM

colon_pow: maybe he just recognized it as a gotcha type question and didn't feel like playing that little game.


Do you think asking the question bluntly, like "Are you a religious whackadoo and plan on legislating/governing like one?" would have produced a more compelling answer?
 
2012-11-19 04:28:34 PM
I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow.


How different demographics with different beliefs vote certainly will.
 
2012-11-19 04:29:00 PM

lennavan: You wouldn't ask a Chemist about evolution.


actually, i've read, right on this site, that chemical evolution preceded evolution. something about self-replicating enzymes or something.
 
2012-11-19 04:29:02 PM

lennavan: Marco Rubio: I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I'm not a scientist. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.

I'm struggling to see the poutrage here. I can't find a single portion of his statement I disagree with. Indeed, I wish all politicians echoed this exact sentiment.

He's right, he is not the correct person to answer this question, and the journalist should feel bad for asking a politician it.


There are two possible problems:
A) he does not have a highschool education
or
b) he is pretending not to, so that he doesn't insult his constituents who think a high school education is incompatible with faith in god.
 
2012-11-19 04:30:02 PM

MindfulModeration: skullkrusher: GoldSpider: MindfulModeration: "Existance" and "the creation of the Earth" are not synonyms you puerile cretin.

The word "cretin" is pathetically underused.

especially in such lulzy fashion

No kidding. That'll farking teach me to think I'm better than auto-correct.


autocorrect is usually right. Except in this case where it is telling me I spelled its name wrong
 
2012-11-19 04:31:17 PM
Can somebody translate Freepertalk?

Over in Freeperland they're saying Rubio was:

"born in miami of 2 cuban citizens.
a US citizen... but not a natural born citizen."

So, this means Sarah Palin is automatically President?
 
2012-11-19 04:32:00 PM

colon_pow: lennavan: You wouldn't ask a Chemist about evolution.

actually, i've read, right on this site, that chemical evolution preceded evolution. something about self-replicating enzymes or something.


The leading hypothesis regarding the origin of life on Earth is essentially that imperfectly self-replicating chemical compounds arose and replicated until resources became scarce, and thus, natural selection was born.
 
2012-11-19 04:32:11 PM

lennavan: Tigger: In order to not be sure how old the earth is you have to be in the "total farking moron with no business doing anything more important than sticking your cock in a toaster" level of farkwittage.

How many people in this thread do you think knew how old the Earth is before googling it? I'm thinkin, on the spot, without access to Google, I also would have said "Farked if I know, I'm not the right person to ask." And I'm a scientist.

Tigger: This isn't "a topic he shouldn't know about" this is "a topic that is basic knowledge in 2012".

I guess this is where I admit I had no idea how old the Earth was before I googled it. I assume you did though, right? Because that would be hilariously hypocritical of you and would totally undermine your point right now and everyone reading this back-and-forth who also didn't know the number off of the top of their head is going to agree with this run-on sentence. But I'm sure you knew.


Well, between your inability to form sentences and your (pretty staggering) ignorance, I assume you were home schooled, or are a dropout. AMIRITE?
 
2012-11-19 04:32:15 PM

lennavan: thurstonxhowell: lennavan: There are more if you like:

That's you insisting that that's what people are hammering you on, not people hammering you on that. There's a difference.

So if I follow - I have been arguing one thing all along and people are hammering me on something else.

[strawman.jpg]

Hey, it's not often someone openly admits it. Kudos to you, sir.


They're arguing that Marco Rubio went further than deferring to experts. You disagree, but pretend that they're arguing that they're saying deferring to experts is bad. This isn't rocket surgery.
 
2012-11-19 04:33:29 PM

colon_pow: lennavan: You wouldn't ask a Chemist about evolution.

actually, i've read, right on this site, that chemical evolution preceded evolution. something about self-replicating enzymes or something.


Correct me if I'm wrong here- But if evolution proceeded evolution, you're dividing by zero in at least a couple of your equations.
 
2012-11-19 04:34:10 PM

lennavan:
What if he didn't know how old the Earth was off the top of his head?


Same deal, the chances of any scientists not knowing such a common science fact are so low that I'd doubt such a person was a scientist until presented with further proof.


Quite the contrary. Scientists who can cross disciplines are the exception to the rule. They are the ones who go on to do truly great work.

Those are people who become experts in more than one field. There is a big difference between being an expert and having at least a grade school understanding of a subject that would inform you that the earth is billions of years old for example. If just having some general knowledge was enough I would be a rather exceptional individual for knowing a little bit about a lot of different subjects. But in reality, I does me little good as I'm not an expert in any of these areas.
 
Displayed 50 of 622 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report