Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Slate)   Marco Rubio tries to distance himself from his earlier creationist remarks on the age of the earth   (slate.com) divider line 99
    More: Followup, age of the earth, Marco Rubio, scientific process, innovations, rhetoric of science  
•       •       •

2877 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Dec 2012 at 1:15 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-17 09:53:41 AM  
Note, importantly, that Obama was asked this question in a religious setting, yet still supported science-he went out of his way to do so. When Rubio was asked the same question in a secular setting, he turned to religion.

That's because Republicans have to kowtow shamelessly to the bible thumper crowd in order to even show up on the ballot.

My original beef with Rubio's original comments was in how he carefully skirted the real question of whether or not he thinks ID or it's ilk should be taught in schools alongside biology.

Even in this interview ostensibly distancing himself from his earlier "one of life's great mysteries" derp he seems to hedge his bets.

He is definitely running in 2016.
 
2012-12-17 10:37:16 AM  
He shouldn't distance himself too much. He'll fall off the edge of the Earth.
 
2012-12-17 11:00:15 AM  
He might not be moving much on the X, Y, or Z axis, but on the time axis he is receding from his remarks at the speed of light.
 
2012-12-17 11:41:33 AM  

Diogenes: He shouldn't distance himself too much. He'll fall off the edge of the Earth.


Hopefully he'll hit an elephant on the way down and then be bounced off of a flipper into the sun.
 
2012-12-17 11:54:50 AM  
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.

TEACH THE CONTROVERSY!!!

Of course, you do, you Republican panderer.

Because one "side" has no basis in fact, but is a bunch of stories from a 5000 year old tribe of herding nomads, you therefore give both "sides" equal time because "you aren't a scientist."

You're not fit to lead a society in the 21st century either, apparently.
 
2012-12-17 12:59:01 PM  

Diogenes: He shouldn't distance himself too much. He'll fall off the edge of the Earth.


I had no idea he was a flat-earther, too. How sad.
 
2012-12-17 01:14:18 PM  
So, he's mainly pandering to the religious nutjobs, rather than a religious nutjob himself.

Yay?
 
2012-12-17 01:16:56 PM  
Yeah he's no doubt running
 
2012-12-17 01:18:27 PM  
I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.

Sure. Mysterious only to stupid people, though
 
2012-12-17 01:18:42 PM  

Generation_D: bunch of stories from a 5000 year old tribe of herding nomads


Actually more like 2500-3000 years old.
 
2012-12-17 01:18:42 PM  
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.

Sorry, there is no walking back from that amount of stupid. The only thing acceptable would be if he was just honest and said "I didn't want to piss of religious people so I lied to them".
 
2012-12-17 01:21:29 PM  

GiantRex: Diogenes: He shouldn't distance himself too much. He'll fall off the edge of the Earth.

I had no idea he was a flat-earther, too. How sad.


Snark. I have no idea what he actually believes. Which in a roundabout way is the problem here.
 
2012-12-17 01:22:17 PM  

Diogenes: GiantRex: Diogenes: He shouldn't distance himself too much. He'll fall off the edge of the Earth.

I had no idea he was a flat-earther, too. How sad.

Snark. I have no idea what he actually believes. Which in a roundflatabout way is the problem here.

 
2012-12-17 01:23:01 PM  
Note, importantly, that Obama was asked this question in a religious setting, yet still supported science-he went out of his way to do so.

No more so than Rubio did. If you showed someone the two comments side by side without attributions, they wouldn't be able to tell them apart.

"Barack Obama: I'm trying to remember if we've had this conversation. What I've said to them is that I believe that God created the universe and that the six days in the Bible may not be six days as we understand it - it may not be 24-hour days. And that's what I believe. I know there's always a debate between those who read the Bible literally and those who don't, and that I think is a legitimate debate within the Christian community of which I'm a part. You know, my belief is that the story the Bible tells about God creating this magnificent Earth on which we live, that that is essentially true, that is fundamentally true. Now, whether it happened exactly as we might understand it reading the text of the Bible? That, you know, I don't presume to know." 

There's not a helluva lot of "supporting science" in there.
 
2012-12-17 01:26:28 PM  

Pincy: 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.

Sorry, there is no walking back from that amount of stupid. The only thing acceptable would be if he was just honest and said "I didn't want to piss of religious people so I lied to them".


heh you picked the bit line of Rubio's quote which is basically the same as the comparable line in the Obama quote he references

"What I've said to them is that I believe that God created the universe and that the six days in the Bible may not be six days as we understand it ... it may not be 24-hour days, and that's what I believe."
 
2012-12-17 01:27:00 PM  

cirby: Note, importantly, that Obama was asked this question in a religious setting, yet still supported science-he went out of his way to do so.

No more so than Rubio did. If you showed someone the two comments side by side without attributions, they wouldn't be able to tell them apart.

"Barack Obama: I'm trying to remember if we've had this conversation. What I've said to them is that I believe that God created the universe and that the six days in the Bible may not be six days as we understand it - it may not be 24-hour days. And that's what I believe. I know there's always a debate between those who read the Bible literally and those who don't, and that I think is a legitimate debate within the Christian community of which I'm a part. You know, my belief is that the story the Bible tells about God creating this magnificent Earth on which we live, that that is essentially true, that is fundamentally true. Now, whether it happened exactly as we might understand it reading the text of the Bible? That, you know, I don't presume to know." 

There's not a helluva lot of "supporting science" in there.


Be careful, I was crucified in the first thread about this for suggesting Rubio wasn't as crazy for what he said as everyone took it.


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.

Seems to me, Rubio said only a scientist could tell you how old the Earth is. What a jackass, right?
 
2012-12-17 01:29:03 PM  

lennavan: cirby: Note, importantly, that Obama was asked this question in a religious setting, yet still supported science-he went out of his way to do so.

No more so than Rubio did. If you showed someone the two comments side by side without attributions, they wouldn't be able to tell them apart.

"Barack Obama: I'm trying to remember if we've had this conversation. What I've said to them is that I believe that God created the universe and that the six days in the Bible may not be six days as we understand it - it may not be 24-hour days. And that's what I believe. I know there's always a debate between those who read the Bible literally and those who don't, and that I think is a legitimate debate within the Christian community of which I'm a part. You know, my belief is that the story the Bible tells about God creating this magnificent Earth on which we live, that that is essentially true, that is fundamentally true. Now, whether it happened exactly as we might understand it reading the text of the Bible? That, you know, I don't presume to know." 

There's not a helluva lot of "supporting science" in there.

Be careful, I was crucified in the first thread about this for suggesting Rubio wasn't as crazy for what he said as everyone took it.


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 ...


Except that any middle-schooler could also tell you how old the earth is.
 
2012-12-17 01:43:01 PM  
It's okay if you don't know exactly what he really believes. It worked well for Romney.
 
2012-12-17 01:47:36 PM  

Pincy: Except that any middle-schooler could also tell you how old the earth is.


Right, this was brought up last time. A middle schooler can also tell you the different types of clouds and what they are. How outrageous would it be if Rubio was unaware of the types of clouds? Whatever your answer, we can agree, Marco Rubio was unable to recall a scientific fact taught in middle school and give it the appropriate level of outrage.
 
2012-12-17 01:53:32 PM  

lennavan: Pincy: Except that any middle-schooler could also tell you how old the earth is.

Right, this was brought up last time. A middle schooler can also tell you the different types of clouds and what they are. How outrageous would it be if Rubio was unaware of the types of clouds? Whatever your answer, we can agree, Marco Rubio was unable to recall a scientific fact taught in middle school and give it the appropriate level of outrage.


No, he didn't just say that he couldn't recall, he said that we'd never really know. Big difference.
 
2012-12-17 01:53:33 PM  
The problem wasn't that he said that there was no possible way of knowing if the earth was created in seven days or was seven eras old. That comment is perfectly fine to me. In fact, I would have been fine with him saying that there's no way of knowing whether or not my his created the world last Thursday. Because, that statement would have been 100% true and accurate. It is mathematically impossible to disprove
 
2012-12-17 01:54:42 PM  

lennavan: Pincy: Except that any middle-schooler could also tell you how old the earth is.

Right, this was brought up last time. A middle schooler can also tell you the different types of clouds and what they are. How outrageous would it be if Rubio was unaware of the types of clouds? Whatever your answer, we can agree, Marco Rubio was unable to recall a scientific fact taught in middle school and give it the appropriate level of outrage.


We should take no pride in a finding that 70 percent of Americans cannot read and understand the science section of the New York Times.

Approximately 28 percent of American adults currently qualify as scientifically literate.

Only 37 percent of American adults accepted the concept of biological evolution in 2008, 37 percent.
 
2012-12-17 01:56:38 PM  

The Larch: The problem wasn't that he said that there was no possible way of knowing if the earth was created in seven days or was seven eras old. That comment is perfectly fine to me. In fact, I would have been fine with him saying that there's no way of knowing whether or not my his created the world last Thursday. Because, that statement would have been 100% true and accurate. It is mathematically impossible to disprove



www.sadanduseless.com
 
2012-12-17 01:58:00 PM  
Call me when he puts 13.75 billion light years between him and his old position.
 
2012-12-17 01:59:49 PM  

The Larch: The problem wasn't that he said that there was no possible way of knowing if the earth was created in seven days or was seven eras old. That comment is perfectly fine to me. In fact, I would have been fine with him saying that there's no way of knowing whether or not my his created the world last Thursday. Because, that statement would have been 100% true and accurate. It is mathematically impossible to disprove


So how do I know that I am even typing this right now?
 
2012-12-17 01:59:55 PM  

andrewagill: Call me when he puts 13.75 billion light years between him and his old position.


Oh, wait, sorry. Age of the *Earth*. Call me when he puts 4.54 billion light years between him and his former position.
 
2012-12-17 02:00:22 PM  
Well, I'm not sure why that got cut off. To continue...

The Larch: The problem wasn't that he said that there was no possible way of knowing if the earth was created in seven days or was seven eras old. That comment is perfectly fine to me. In fact, I would have been fine with him saying that there's no way of knowing whether or not his created the world last Thursday. Because, that statement would have been 100% true and accurate. It is mathematically impossible to disprove Last Thursdayism.


I am fine with politicians making 100% factually true statements, even if they are strange epistemological arguments that don't appear to be related to the question asked.

The real problem I have with Marco Rubio is that he said we should teach creationism in schools. He's made no attempt to walk back on that statement, either.

I will never vote for a politician who believes that we should teach creationism in schools. Therefore, I will never vote for Marco Rubio.
 
2012-12-17 02:05:38 PM  
"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 have a huge problem with this.

The age of the Earth and the solar system is one of the unifying concepts of science specifically mentioned in the U.S. National Education Standards-an educator-created list of concepts which all students should know upon graduating high school.

The age of the Earth is 4.54 billion years ... plus or minus 50 million years. That's a number known to an accuracy of 99 percent, which is pretty farking good.

We know this because science works. A large number of independent fields of science show that the Earth is terribly old, and all these different scientific areas-highly successful in their own rights-converge on the same age of the Earth. This number is very well known, very well understood, and the process behind its determination is a foundational assumption across all fields of science..



Seriously, stop it. Just stop it with your pandering and man the fark up;
 
2012-12-17 02:07:19 PM  

Pincy: lennavan: Pincy: Except that any middle-schooler could also tell you how old the earth is.

Right, this was brought up last time. A middle schooler can also tell you the different types of clouds and what they are. How outrageous would it be if Rubio was unaware of the types of clouds? Whatever your answer, we can agree, Marco Rubio was unable to recall a scientific fact taught in middle school and give it the appropriate level of outrage.

No, he didn't just say that he couldn't recall, he said that we'd never really know. Big difference.


The very first words out of his mouth were "I'm not a scientist man." The very first.

wotthefark: We should take no pride in a finding that 70 percent of Americans cannot read and understand the science section of the New York Times.


Wouldn't it be nice if a Congressman said we should trust scientists? I mean, if he was a Republican that would just be icing on the farking cake, right?

wotthefark: Approximately 28 percent of American adults currently qualify as scientifically literate.

Only 37 percent of American adults accepted the concept of biological evolution in 2008, 37 percent.


That's ridiculous. You know what I wish? I wish when we talked about science, people would trust scientists more. Like for instance when someone who gets media attention is asked a science question, I wish if they didn't know, they would say something like "fark man, I'm not a scientist, I'm not qualified to tell you about evolution. Go ask them." Instead we get dipshiats like Jenny McCarthy who get attention pulling science bullshiat out of their ass. Hell we even get congresspeople making science shiat up about how rape victims can't get pregnant and crap. You know what would be better? If they just said "I don't know shiat about autism or pregnancy, go ask a scientist."

I really wish a Congressperson would lead the charge here and tell us all to go listen to a scientist. Oh wait.
 
2012-12-17 02:11:15 PM  

andrewagill: e puts 4.54 billion li


Error bars, you godless baby killer. I mean, it could be 4.54 byo, or it could be 4.49 byo. That five millions years proves your argument is completely invalidated.
 
2012-12-17 02:13:05 PM  

Pincy: The Larch: The problem wasn't that he said that there was no possible way of knowing if the earth was created in seven days or was seven eras old. That comment is perfectly fine to me. In fact, I would have been fine with him saying that there's no way of knowing whether or not my his created the world last Thursday. Because, that statement would have been 100% true and accurate. It is mathematically impossible to disprove

So how do I know that I am even typing this right now?


Well, that's the thing. I have no way of proving that you're typing anything. And if we suppose Marco Rubio is just some strange guy with asperger's who has an obsessive need to bring up solipsistic arguments in interviews in men's fashion magazines, then I'm fine with what he said. I mean, he's probably not going to get my vote, but by itself it's not actually a deal breaker for me.

But he wasn't just bringing up the freshman stoner solipsistic argument that we can't truly know anything about the world. Instead, he went on to say that since we have no way of knowing how old the world is, we should teach creationism in schools. That, I'm afraid, is a deal breaker for me. I can't vote for someone who wants to teach creationism.

// Also, there's a very good chance that Marco Rubio is not a poorly-socialized obsessive compulsive who feels compelled to answer questions with inappropriate discussions he saw in his introduction to philosophy textbook. There's a very good chance that he understood exactly what he was saying, and was trying to connect to a very specific audience with his remarks. But I really don't know Marco Rubio, so I can't say that for certain.
 
2012-12-17 02:15:46 PM  

lennavan: Seems to me, Rubio said only a scientist could tell you how old the Earth is. What a jackass, right?


Seems to me that Rubio is trying to walk both sides of that line between science and religion, but is instead dancing the interpretive dance of DERP all over it.

// "I'm no scientist, man. Theology has some theories, as does science. Let's teach them all!" is not a good answer
 
2012-12-17 02:17:01 PM  

The Larch: But he wasn't just bringing up the freshman stoner solipsistic argument that we can't truly know anything about the world. Instead, he went on to say that since we have no way of knowing how old the world is, we should teach creationism in schools. That, I'm afraid, is a deal breaker for me. I can't vote for someone who wants to teach creationism.


I certainly hope you mean you're against teaching creationism in science class. I think it would do our country a world of good if schools had a religion class where we went through what each of the religions teaches, including creationism.
 
2012-12-17 02:18:05 PM  

The Larch: Well, I'm not sure why that got cut off. To continue...

The Larch: The problem wasn't that he said that there was no possible way of knowing if the earth was created in seven days or was seven eras old. That comment is perfectly fine to me. In fact, I would have been fine with him saying that there's no way of knowing whether or not his created the world last Thursday. Because, that statement would have been 100% true and accurate. It is mathematically impossible to disprove Last Thursdayism.

I am fine with politicians making 100% factually true statements, even if they are strange epistemological arguments that don't appear to be related to the question asked.

The real problem I have with Marco Rubio is that he said we should teach creationism in schools. He's made no attempt to walk back on that statement, either.

I will never vote for a politician who believes that we should teach creationism in schools. Therefore, I will never vote for Marco Rubio.


Last Thursdayism is solipsism and uses the fallacy of reductio ad absurdum. It's a weak argument at best it's not even epistemological. Epistemology meaning "knowledge, understanding".

Can he have that opinion, sure; but it makes him a moron.
 
2012-12-17 02:20:34 PM  

Dr Dreidel: lennavan: Seems to me, Rubio said only a scientist could tell you how old the Earth is. What a jackass, right?

Seems to me that Rubio is trying to walk both sides of that line between science and religion, but is instead dancing the interpretive dance of DERP all over it.

// "I'm no scientist, man. Theology has some theories, as does science. Let's teach them all!" is not a good answer


It reads to me as a "ask a farking scientist" surrounded by mollifying his religious conservative base. Why can't the left take the victory for what it was? A conservative Republican with national exposure just told us all to ask science questions to scientists. Yay!
 
2012-12-17 02:22:19 PM  

lennavan: Pincy: lennavan: Pincy: Except that any middle-schooler could also tell you how old the earth is.

Right, this was brought up last time. A middle schooler can also tell you the different types of clouds and what they are. How outrageous would it be if Rubio was unaware of the types of clouds? Whatever your answer, we can agree, Marco Rubio was unable to recall a scientific fact taught in middle school and give it the appropriate level of outrage.

No, he didn't just say that he couldn't recall, he said that we'd never really know. Big difference.

The very first words out of his mouth were "I'm not a scientist man." The very first.


Most of us aren't, but we also know that science has determined the age of the earth. I don't have to be a scientist to know the earth revolves around the sun, do I?
 
2012-12-17 02:25:06 PM  

lennavan: The Larch: But he wasn't just bringing up the freshman stoner solipsistic argument that we can't truly know anything about the world. Instead, he went on to say that since we have no way of knowing how old the world is, we should teach creationism in schools. That, I'm afraid, is a deal breaker for me. I can't vote for someone who wants to teach creationism.

I certainly hope you mean you're against teaching creationism in science class. I think it would do our country a world of good if schools had a religion class where we went through what each of the religions teaches, including creationism.


I'm OK with teaching creationism in some sort of "world mythology" class, but I'd be suspicious of any class that spent more than a few minutes on it. I mean, there are hundreds of world creation myths, and a lot of them are a lot more interesting than the fairly bland story of "A giant god parted the waters to create land, made some light, and made the first dude out of dirt."

// But there have been a lot of really interesting retcon's to the the christian creation myth that make it a hell of a lot more interesting, like God breathed free will into man and didn't keep any for himself, or that the story is actually talking about two gods, both male and female, etc. You could spend a lot of time just on those alone.
/// But not in highschool
 
2012-12-17 02:26:44 PM  

lennavan: Pincy: lennavan: Pincy: Except that any middle-schooler could also tell you how old the earth is.

Right, this was brought up last time. A middle schooler can also tell you the different types of clouds and what they are. How outrageous would it be if Rubio was unaware of the types of clouds? Whatever your answer, we can agree, Marco Rubio was unable to recall a scientific fact taught in middle school and give it the appropriate level of outrage.

No, he didn't just say that he couldn't recall, he said that we'd never really know. Big difference.

The very first words out of his mouth were "I'm not a scientist man." The very first.

wotthefark: We should take no pride in a finding that 70 percent of Americans cannot read and understand the science section of the New York Times.

Wouldn't it be nice if a Congressman said we should trust scientists? I mean, if he was a Republican that would just be icing on the farking cake, right?

wotthefark: Approximately 28 percent of American adults currently qualify as scientifically literate.

Only 37 percent of American adults accepted the concept of biological evolution in 2008, 37 percent.

That's ridiculous. You know what I wish? I wish when we talked about science, people would trust scientists more. Like for instance when someone who gets media attention is asked a science question, I wish if they didn't know, they would say something like "fark man, I'm not a scientist, I'm not qualified to tell you about evolution. Go ask them." Instead we get dipshiats like Jenny McCarthy who get attention pulling science bullshiat out of their ass. Hell we even get congresspeople making science shiat up about how rape victims can't get pregnant and crap. You know what would be better? If they just said "I don't know shiat about autism or pregnancy, go ask a scientist."

I really wish a Congressperson would lead the charge here and tell us all to go listen to a scientist. Oh wait.


That's even more ridiculous. It's a basic tenant of high school science education to understand evolution.

You understand you have to pay taxes in some form or another? Do you say I don't know go ask an accountant?

You understand that you have indoor plumbing? You don't say I don't know go ask a plumber?

Can vaccines prevent illness? I don;t know go ask the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons?

There is no correlation between autism and vaccines want to know why I know? because we live in a world of information and science.
 
2012-12-17 02:27:06 PM  
img607.imageshack.us
TEACH THE CONTROVERSY
 
2012-12-17 02:28:53 PM  

Diogenes: GiantRex: Diogenes: He shouldn't distance himself too much. He'll fall off the edge of the Earth.

I had no idea he was a flat-earther, too. How sad.

Snark. I have no idea what he actually believes. Which in a roundabout way is the problem here.


Yeah, Romney didn't fare too well with that approach.
 
2012-12-17 02:30:29 PM  

ilambiquated: Generation_D: bunch of stories from a 5000 year old tribe of herding nomads

Actually more like 2500-3000 years old.


Most of Old Testament was probably written at the Library of Alexandria. Historical accuracy of the books tends to increase when events are more recent. Therefore, they're less than 2300 years old.
 
2012-12-17 02:30:53 PM  

lennavan: That's ridiculous. You know what I wish? I wish when we talked about science, people would trust scientists more. Like for instance when someone who gets media attention is asked a science question, I wish if they didn't know, they would say something like "fark man, I'm not a scientist, I'm not qualified to tell you about evolution. Go ask them." Instead we get dipshiats like Jenny McCarthy who get attention pulling science bullshiat out of their ass. Hell we even get congresspeople making science shiat up about how rape victims can't get pregnant and crap. You know what would be better? If they just said "I don't know shiat about autism or pregnancy, go ask a scientist."


i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-17 02:35:36 PM  

lennavan: It reads to me as a "ask a farking scientist" surrounded by mollifying his religious conservative base. Why can't the left take the victory for what it was? A conservative Republican with national exposure just told us all to ask science questions to scientists. Yay!


Keep in mind he also said this as part of the answer Rubio gave to GQ: 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.

He's also said this in the past regarding teaching evolution in schools: I don't want a school system that teaches kids that what they're learning at home is wrong.

Marco Rubio did not say leave it to scientists. Instead, he has consistently said that we should be teaching children that creationism is a perfectly valid alternative to science in public schools.
 
2012-12-17 02:39:38 PM  

Pincy: lennavan: Pincy: lennavan: Pincy: Except that any middle-schooler could also tell you how old the earth is.

Right, this was brought up last time. A middle schooler can also tell you the different types of clouds and what they are. How outrageous would it be if Rubio was unaware of the types of clouds? Whatever your answer, we can agree, Marco Rubio was unable to recall a scientific fact taught in middle school and give it the appropriate level of outrage.

No, he didn't just say that he couldn't recall, he said that we'd never really know. Big difference.

The very first words out of his mouth were "I'm not a scientist man." The very first.

Most of us aren't, but we also know that science has determined the age of the earth. I don't have to be a scientist to know the earth revolves around the sun, do I?


If you didn't know the answer to that question, what would you say? Would you say something like "Ask a scientist?"

Now let's bring this slightly closer to reality. What if I was on a committee interviewing you for a job at my Catholic Hospital and I wanted to know where you stand on religion. Why? Because drama gives me the lulz (to sell newspapers). I'm not allowed to ask you a question directly about your religion, so instead I ask you "how old is the Earth?" You don't give a shiat either way, you're interviewing for a position in the finance department.

If you say 4.5 billion, you might not get the job because someone on the committee might be a loony.
If you say 5,000 you might not get the job because you're wrong and everyone on the committee is going to think you're an idiot.

So you say "I'm not qualified to answer that, I'm not a scientist. I came here to talk about finance. Some people believe X some people believe Y but I'm not a scientist." What a jackass you'd be, right?
 
2012-12-17 02:40:48 PM  

The Larch: He's also said this in the past regarding teaching evolution in schools: I don't want a school system that teaches kids that what they're learning at home is wrong.


So be upset about that, not this.

The Larch: Marco Rubio did not say leave it to scientists. Instead, he has consistently said that we should be teaching children that creationism is a perfectly valid alternative to science in public schools.


When he says that, be upset. This is not that.
 
2012-12-17 02:43:02 PM  

lennavan: Dr Dreidel: lennavan: Seems to me, Rubio said only a scientist could tell you how old the Earth is. What a jackass, right?

Seems to me that Rubio is trying to walk both sides of that line between science and religion, but is instead dancing the interpretive dance of DERP all over it.

// "I'm no scientist, man. Theology has some theories, as does science. Let's teach them all!" is not a good answer

It reads to me as a "ask a farking scientist" surrounded by mollifying his religious conservative base. Why can't the left take the victory for what it was? A conservative Republican with national exposure just told us all to ask science questions to scientists. Yay!


I just reread Rubio's quote. I don't see anywhere in there where he said to "ask a scientist". Yes, he did say "I'm not a scientist" several times. I'm not sure why he felt the need to keep saying that? I don't think anybody was under the assumption that he was. Yet again, I don't think most people think that you need to be a scientist to know that science has a very good estimate of the age of the earth.

Rubio did point out that he felt the question wasn't relevant, but then he went on to give his " I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries." answer. So we are to believe that he is "not a scientist" yet he feels comfortable telling us the age of the earth is a mystery we'll never be able to answer. How does he know that if he isn't a scientist?
 
2012-12-17 02:47:12 PM  

Diogenes: He shouldn't distance himself too much. He'll fall off the edge of the Earth.


Or it will tip over.
 
2012-12-17 02:48:36 PM  

lennavan: Dr Dreidel: lennavan: Seems to me, Rubio said only a scientist could tell you how old the Earth is. What a jackass, right?

Seems to me that Rubio is trying to walk both sides of that line between science and religion, but is instead dancing the interpretive dance of DERP all over it.

// "I'm no scientist, man. Theology has some theories, as does science. Let's teach them all!" is not a good answer

It reads to me as a "ask a farking scientist" surrounded by mollifying his religious conservative base. Why can't the left take the victory for what it was? A conservative Republican with national exposure just told us all to ask science questions to scientists. Yay!


And that's the problem (well, the two) - 1that there is a "base" that needs mollifying, and 2over something as innocuous as "ask a scientist the science questions".

I say this all the time - I went to HS where we studied Genesis in the morning and Earth Science in the afternoon, and I never once heard a morning teacher telling me to ignore the afternooners, or vice-versa. If the willfully stupid cannot be arsed to "recognize" what scientific fact says, they're denying the truth of the world/universe god created, no?

God goes through all the trouble to create a physical universe where the rules are JUST SO; and religion says "Ignore that beauty because my minister's interpretation of this book says so"? Fark that with a fistful of rusty barbed wire.
 
2012-12-17 02:49:05 PM  

lennavan: The Larch: He's also said this in the past regarding teaching evolution in schools: I don't want a school system that teaches kids that what they're learning at home is wrong.

So be upset about that, not this.

The Larch: Marco Rubio did not say leave it to scientists. Instead, he has consistently said that we should be teaching children that creationism is a perfectly valid alternative to science in public schools.

When he says that, be upset. This is not that.


I'm upset about what he said in the GQ article. In the GQ article, he said that we should be teaching creationism in schools as a valid alternative to science.
 
2012-12-17 02:53:16 PM  

lennavan: Pincy: lennavan: Pincy: lennavan: Pincy: Except that any middle-schooler could also tell you how old the earth is.

Right, this was brought up last time. A middle schooler can also tell you the different types of clouds and what they are. How outrageous would it be if Rubio was unaware of the types of clouds? Whatever your answer, we can agree, Marco Rubio was unable to recall a scientific fact taught in middle school and give it the appropriate level of outrage.

No, he didn't just say that he couldn't recall, he said that we'd never really know. Big difference.

The very first words out of his mouth were "I'm not a scientist man." The very first.

Most of us aren't, but we also know that science has determined the age of the earth. I don't have to be a scientist to know the earth revolves around the sun, do I?

If you didn't know the answer to that question, what would you say? Would you say something like "Ask a scientist?"

Now let's bring this slightly closer to reality. What if I was on a committee interviewing you for a job at my Catholic Hospital and I wanted to know where you stand on religion. Why? Because drama gives me the lulz (to sell newspapers). I'm not allowed to ask you a question directly about your religion, so instead I ask you "how old is the Earth?" You don't give a shiat either way, you're interviewing for a position in the finance department.

If you say 4.5 billion, you might not get the job because someone on the committee might be a loony.
If you say 5,000 you might not get the job because you're wrong and everyone on the committee is going to think you're an idiot.

So you say "I'm not qualified to answer that, I'm not a scientist. I came here to talk about finance. Some people believe X some people believe Y but I'm not a scientist." What a jackass you'd be, right?


Ahh, you've set up the perfect scenario, if only Rubio could have been there.

You want to talk reality? You do realize that Rubio is on the Subcommittee on Science and Space, right?

I'm not allowed to ask you a question directly about your religion, so instead I ask you "how old is the Earth?" You don't give a shiat either way, you're interviewing for a position in the finance department.

I imagine the first thing I would say is "That's an interesting question that doesn't really seem to have anything to do with finance. Can you elaborate a little more on this so I understand exactly what you are trying to get at?"

That's what Rubio should have done if he didn't want to answer the question.
 
Displayed 50 of 99 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report