Marco Rubio, Republican Savior?

[Cave Johnson]

Moderates will love this guy!

When asked how old he thinks the Earth is, Rubio makes that much clear:

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.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast....scientist.html

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by blaise

He actually says, "he's not a scientist." Indicating that he believes a scientist would have the answer. That doesn't really seem like he's discrediting scientists.

That would be like you asking me to diagnose an illness, me saying I'm not a doctor, and then you saying I'm discrediting medicine.

You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

[go bowe]

Originally Posted by Literature

You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

bob, is that you?

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by cdcox

"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."

From what I can tell he was referring to the difference in beliefs of those who believe that the Bible is the literal word of God and those that believe in the Bible creation story as allegory. He never addressed any aspect of a scientific answer to the origin of the Earth. To me that is a calculated move to appeal to evangelical Christians. The entire paragraph reads like an off-the-cuff remark intended to pander to a section of Republican voters.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by listopencil

From what I can tell he was referring to the difference in beliefs of those who believe that the Bible is the literal word of God and those that believe in the Bible creation story as allegory. He never addressed any aspect of a scientific answer to the origin of the Earth. To me that is a calculated move to appeal to evangelical Christians. The entire paragraph reads like an off-the-cuff remark intended to pander to a section of Republican voters.

That pandering carries a ton of baggage.

In TN, the state legislature passed a bill that allows teachers to teach creationism in public classrooms.

Many Americans openly doubt the age of the Earth, evolution, climate change, ozone depletion, etc without any scientific justification.

We are falling behind much of the world in science education, PhDs graduated, and engineers graduated. Coincidence? If we don't lead in innovation, we won't have world class economy.

It's not harmless and I won't tolerate it in a candidate. I won't vote for republicans as long as they provide safe harbor for these points of view.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by cdcox

That pandering carries a ton of baggage.

In TN, the state legislature passed a bill that allows teachers to teach creationism in public classrooms.

Many Americans openly doubt the age of the Earth, evolution, climate change, ozone depletion, etc without any scientific justification.

We are falling behind much of the world in science education, PhDs graduated, and engineers graduated. Coincidence? If we don't lead in innovation, we won't have world class economy.

It's not harmless and I won't tolerate it in a candidate. I won't vote for republicans as long as they provide safe harbor for these points of view.

I agree with you. Not only for the many points you have made, but also because I think it carries over into social policies.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by cdcox

"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 put the word unanswerable in quotations as if he said the word.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by cdcox

We are falling behind much of the world in science education, PhDs graduated, and engineers graduated. Coincidence? If we don't lead in innovation, we won't have world class economy.

That has nothing to do with a President's duties.

[FishingRod]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

I get it that he is cuban. He's good looking, can put two sentences together and has conservative beliefs. But its never going to happen.

The dude lied about his background for years until he was caught. Loudly proclaimed and jazzed up crowds with his families hardship under Castro and how happy they were to escape Castro. One little tensy wensy problem.........his family came to America two full years before Castro took power. He lied for over 10 years of his political life. It's why he exists as a politician.

Now, he's going to say that Dinosauers are fake? The earth is only 6000 years old? This is the candidate to get past the perception of the Republican party being anti-science?

I really don’t know much about the guy but must admit the embellishment of his family story doesn’t set very well with me. It also didn’t sit well with me when Hilary fabricated the story about being under sniper fire. Unfortunately one must balance our perception of the moral character of a politician with their ability of doing the job. Few would argue that Jimmy carter was a more honest man than Bill Clinton but fewer still would argue that Clinton wasn’t a far more affective president.

[dirk digler]

Just so we are fair:

"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 I think it's a legitimate debate within the Christian community of which I'm a part."

Sen. Barack Obama, quoted by Slate in April 2008, when asked if the Earth was created in six days.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Just so we are fair:

"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 I think it's a legitimate debate within the Christian community of which I'm a part."

Sen. Barack Obama, quoted by Slate in April 2008, when asked if the Earth was created in six days.

Well, that's different, because....

[Cave Johnson]

Originally Posted by blaise

Well, that's different, because....

He got the number of biblical days right.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by Cave Johnson

He got the number of biblical days right.

He must be a religious nut job.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by cdcox

That pandering carries a ton of baggage.

It's not harmless and I won't tolerate it in a candidate. I won't vote for republicans as long as they provide safe harbor for these points of view.

Here's something I don't think you look at: While it is true that nothing has reversed the trend of American students not scoring high in math and science since the 1960s, the United States still out performed the former Soviet Union in science and technology. All the govt money the former SU put into science and technology still didn't save them from economic defeat.

Meanwhile, our own govt, in order to compete with the Soviets in the sciences, poured money into it but just got a bunch of psychology or sociology majors to show for it.

So the Soviets went broke because they used it for military conquest.They had hardly any incentives to innovate and produce because there was no freedom and no profit to apply it to goods and services that improved their lives. They actually had to import a lot of technology from us.

So here we have a classic case of govt subsidies being an epic fail. That's because they lacked freedom which allows entrepreneurs to flourish, which is what brings science and technology to markets. Otherwise, those things are useless.

The US defense industry still hires many science and engineering students. But we could reach the same fate as the Soviets if we invest too heavily there ourselves. Other countries in Asia have capital flowing into their private sectors more.

I guess what I am saying is we don't need the govt to command and control what people study in a free country to do well. I'd be more concerned where capital is flowing and how much freedom this country is losing than what some politician believes about the age of the earth.

[FishingRod]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Disqualifying answer for me. He doesn't have the minimal scientific knowledge needed to lead a technological based economy. Why should we fund science if such basic questions are "unanswerable".

So did Obama’s answer disqualify him in your mind. One would assume you didn’t vote for him either time. I mean he thinks the big invisible man in the sky got out his Playdough and Lincoln logs and created the universe.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by FishingRod

So did Obama’s answer disqualify him in your mind. One would assume you didn’t vote for him either time. I mean he thinks the big invisible man in the sky got out his Playdough and Lincoln logs and created the universe.

It's different because Obama meant it in the most intellectual way possible.