I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Want evidence of why the GOP has trouble appealing to younger and more secular voters? Part of the reason is that our candidates feel like they have to give answers like this one:
GQ: How old do you think the Earth is?
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.
Yes, Rubio probably needs to answer that way to get through the Iowa caucuses, and that's the problem. I wish the people that determine our presidential (and Senate) nominees would be perfectly happy for him to have answered simply, "A few billion years."
(I'm giving Rubio the benefit of the doubt in assuming he doesn't think the world is 6,000 years old. He does sit on the Science and Space subcommittee, after all.)
- Comment (219)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (11)
Comments:
May '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
He'll need a shorter version for occasions other than GQ interviews.
But it is essentially sound.
Maybe this:
"Science tells me one answer. My Faith tells me that this is a question neither you nor I can ever know the answer to. And I am asking you: What has how old the universe is got to do with the price of tea in or China, or with how we are going to restore the economy to some semblance of health? And given the tenor of the question you have just asked me, why should I waste another moment of my precious time talking to an arrogant snot such as yourself?"
You might want to leave off that last sentence.
Edited on November 20, 2012 at 4:56amAug '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Edward Smith:
You might want to leave off that last sentence.
I wouldn't. But that's probably why I'm not running for office.
Earlier this year I was in the middle of some heated discussion on politics on the "enemy message board," when suddenly one of those smug little [redacted] asked me almost exactly the same question as was asked of Rubio. It was a complete non-sequitur. But my interrogator wanted some reason to completely dismiss my arguments, and if he needed to brand me a creationist to do it, so much the better. He, after all, was one of those SMART people. Not a bitter clinger, oh no! SCIENCE! was his master.
It's a new religion.
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
I believe God created the heavens and the earth.
Sue me.
May '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
It's an Old Religion.
Saul of Tarsus, renamed Paul, encountered it at the Academy in Athens. And won, using their own weapons (words, carefully arranged) against them.
DrewInWisconsin
Edward Smith:
You might want to leave off that last sentence.
I wouldn't. But that's probably why I'm not running for office.
Earlier this year I was in the middle of some heated discussion on politics on the "enemy message board," when suddenly one of those smug little [redacted] asked me almost exactly the same question as was asked of Rubio. It was a complete non-sequitur. But my interrogator wanted some reason to completely dismiss my arguments, and if he needed to brand me a creationist to do it, so much the better. He, after all, was one of those SMART people. Not a bitter clinger, oh no! SCIENCE! was his master.
It's a new religion. · in 0 minutes
May '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
The Christian Church triumphed over the Pagan Roman Empire by simply (even though there is nothing simple about being a Christian, contrary to the opinion of Social Christians) and honestly and as openly as Discretion dictated - AND WITHOUT APOLOGY -being Christians.
Conservatives need to do the same, or we can never hope to win.
It is a clear and simple (not that being a Conservative even remotely resembles being a simple matter) as that.
Apr '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
You're all wrong.
And the correct response is...
"How old is Gaia? Don't you know it's rude to disclose a lady's age? You give that away and there'll be a super-storm following you around for the rest of your life, my friend."
Edited on November 20, 2012 at 5:53amMay '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
If by Gaia you mean this Lady, I know I wouldn't want to mess around with her.
Anna M.: You're all wrong.
And the correct response is...
"How old is Gaia? Don't you know it's rude to disclose a lady's age? You give that away and there'll be a super-storm with your name on it, my friend." · 3 minutes ago
Edited 0 minutes ago
Dec '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
It is the pandering, pointless, gutlessness of it all that gets me.
When are people like Rubio going to understand that they are being set up every time they do one of these so-called interviews?
Scenario 1: Rubio is asked this question and answers by saying--"The earth is millions of years old." The result would be screaming media headlines about how Rubio is cooked because he can't possibly get the Tea Party vote.
Scenario 2: Rubio is asked this question and answers by saying--"The earth is thousands of years old." The result would be screaming media headlines about how Rubio is cooked because he can't possibly get the independent vote.
Scenario 3: Rubio is asked this question and answers by saying--I'm not quite sure what. Something along the lines of 'waffle waffle bla bla bla.' The result would be screaming media headlines about how Rubio is cooked because he's secretly anti-science and a religious nut. If you don't believe me, just google "marco rubio age of the earth," or go here.
For a saner perspective, try this. Although some of the comments may put you over the edge.
Aug '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.: I believe God created the heavensand the earth.
Sue me.
That's fine, but we live in a scientific age where we have great tools to help us understand the universe. Modern Christians need to reconcile their beliefs with the objective evidence presented them. No, the earth is not 6000 years old. No, there was not an ark that held two of all the animals of the world, nor was there a great worldwide flood. We KNOW this, with as much certainty as we knew the orbital mechanics that allowed us to send a spaceship to another planet and land it within a few hundred meters of our target.
To postulate that these other things happened exactly as stated in the Bible is to deny reality. Or, you can believe that God planted all this evidence to intentionally deceive us, which I would consider to be worse from a theological standpoint.
What you can't do, however, is simply close your eyes to the evidence of science and declare that such evidence does not exist because it conflicts with your personal interpretation of the Bible.
Not if you want my vote, anyway.
Nov '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
He should just say it is an irrelevant question if this comes up in the future. For some people, being a creationist is a deal-break or deal-maker. But for most Americans, they just want to hear about the economy and jobs. If Rubio can show he is concerned about Americans getting to work, and not about the age of the earth, he will look sincere and simultaneously point out that the media is more concerned about their own narrative of Republicans than real issues.
Nov '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
My preferred scenario.
GQ: [with a conceited smirk] How old do you think the Earth is?
MR: That's the stupidest question I ever heard. What has that got to do with my duties as a senator?
GQ: No, really.
MR: I'm a Catholic. I believe God created the earth, space and time. God exists outside time. From God's perspective, everything occurs in eternity - something like a perpetual 'now', but even that does not capture the idea of eternity. Scientists currently tell us that the earth was formed about 3-4 billion years ago. I am comfortable with that, but bear in mind that scientists are always revising these things. From God's perspective, whatever is the current scientific estimate of the earth's age it is less than the blink of His eye.
GQ: ... erm ... So is the earth 6,000 years old? [nods head encouraging him to say 'yes']
MR: I doubt it, based on current scientific estimates. But, really, you should ask me this only if I might be called upon to vote on a government-funded time machine project.
Feb '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
This is an important question which all politicians should be able to answer unequivocally. Not like trivial things like asking the State Department what the capital of Israel is.
Oct '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Rubio hardly deserves to be ridiculed for not believing the consensus age of the Earth when scientists can't even date the Grand Canyon successfully.
Oct '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Dan Hanson:
The universe is about 13.7 billion years old, give or take a few hundred million years. The Earth is about 4 billion years old. These are not matters open for dispute, they are based on observations of the real world, using multiple dating techniques that have proven to be extremely reliable. If we can't even get our candidates to accept basic science, we're screwed.
None of that in bold is true. It is very much disputable because the assumptions can be questioned. It is not based on observations because we aren't vampires so that means no one was there to observe anything. And these dating methods have yet to produce a successful result for dating the Grand Canyon, nevermind the Earth.
Aug '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Molly: On re-read, that last post of mine came across a little harsher than intended. My apologies for that. I don't mean to belittle the issue, and I know finding the right theological place is difficult for everyone.
bereket kelile: I'm not sure what dating the Grand Canyon has to do with determining the age of the universe, the best evidence we have now is that the course of the Colorado River which eventually carved out the Canyon started about 17 million years ago. The way we figured that out is really a fascinating story of human ingenuity. Republicans should celebrate that.
Apr '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
I think this is an important question to know how to answer. The reporter is trying to find out the religious devotion of Rubio. The Federal government sets education curriculum. There are disputes over museums and dinosaurs, and then with dinosaurs being around with hominids and whether you are a Monkey's Uncle (from the Scopes trial) . On David Letterman's show, he asked Obama if the debt was 10T. Obama said he was not sure as it changed every day. Brilliant. So Rubio says he us not a scientist. Brilliant deflection. But will he change curriculum? The reporters will figure out how to ask.
Dec '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Percival
She: It's a dog whistle question. Is Rubio a creationist? A right wing religious extremist? A Tea Party nut job? That's all.
One of the (very few) things I like about Newt Gingrich is that he rarely fails to challenge the premise of idiotic or leading questions. I think he'd have identified the intent of this one, and nailed the response, which is that his opinion on this is quite irrelevant to the difficulties that the country finds itself in today. And I hope he'd have asked the interviewer what HIS (or HER) opinion was . . . · 13 minutes ago
We need to convince Newt that for the good of the party and the preservation of Western Civilization*, he needs to open up a boot camp to teach Republican candidates how to deal with the media.
-----
* It never hurts to go big-picture with Newt. · 12 hours ago
I second that. I'd like to attend myself.
May '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.: I find it fascinating that anyone could hear of this incident and feel anything at all other than outrage at the idiotic media.
[...]
Sure, the question is a little unfair. And, sure, we won't soon be hearing Democrats asked if vaccines cause autism or if Guam may capsize.
That said, complaining about media bias is like complaining about gravity. It's not going away anytime soon, and Republican candidates will have to learn to deal with it.
Aug '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Rubio's answer was fair and good. And who knows what he believes? I don't know why he said "he wasn't qualified to give an answer." Besides, why get involved in theological disputes in GQ magazine? Why talk to GQ? From what I can tell, they don't like conservatives.
May '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
DrewInWisconsin
Matt Smith:
(I'm giving Rubio the benefit of the doubt in assuming he doesn't think the world is 6000 years old. He does sit on the Science and Space sub-committee, after all.)
But what if he did? Would it really matter? And if so, why? · 10 hours ago
The basis of human knowledge about the world around us is the result of the scientific method. The process of formulating a hypothesis, testing it, and accepting the evidence of that test as either supporting or disproving that hypothesis, is the cornerstone of human technological development.
Matters of faith, by their very nature, are not subject to the laws of evidence, and absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But when a theological belief directly contradicts physical evidence to the contrary, one wonders what other facts the believer might ignore.
We no longer expect Christians to believe the earth is flat or the sun revolves around the earth, because of the overwhelming physical evidence to the contrary. While perhaps less well understood, evidence of the age of the earth is similarly clear.