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:
Nov '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
No we don't. Orbital mechanics are TESTABLE, there is no experiment you can conduct to prove that the ark didn't exist, that's a matter of historical evidence. Science requires repeatability.
Science has limits. What scientific evidence can you cite that PROVES George Washington actually existed?
Your science is bad, not mine.
May '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
One thing about measuring Time.
We invented clocks and calendars, basing the units of measurement on models from Nature that make sense.
I have a joke: you will be paid a phenomenal amount of money, at the end of ... one Plutonian Year. That's 400 Earth years, if we apply our standard of what a year is.
When you get to name all the creatures that fly in the air and walk on the earth and swim in her seas, you cannot even claim to know what a cat is - only what the creature you call a cat is.
So, can you prove that 6000 God Years is not equal to 4.8 billion Human Years?
Aug '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
... and the seas by Cthulhu!
;-)
Nov '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Reality is not bound by humans' ability to quantify, describe or understand. Believing that your inability to understand how something could have happened proves it didn't happen is incredibly arrogant.
Apr '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi
Apr '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Matt Smith:
Yes, Rubio probably needs to answer that way to get through the Iowa caucuses, and that's the problem.
Do Iowans who caucus for the GOP differ significantly in their acceptance of "old-earth" candidates from other Americans? Perhaps you can link the data?
Creationism vs. evolution isn't the same as new earth vs. old earth, although they tend to be related. Americans are so deplorable.
Apr '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Schrodinger's Cat: No where in the Bible is the age of the universe or the world stated. The 6000 year figure is an interpretation made by early Bible and Torah scholars from the ages of the patriarchs in Genesis.
Interestingly, Gerald Schroeder has shown how the consensus age of the universe of 13.7 billion years can be harmonized with the Biblical 6 day creation story in Genesis 1. He does this by using Einstein's theory of relativity, noting that the flow of time and space is relative depending on the position of the observer. In Genesis, God is the observer so His time flow is different from our time flow. Schroeder also points out that as the universe expanded after the Big Bang, the flow of time would also change, i.e. the flow of time in the early universe would be different from the flow of time today.
Read Genesis and the Big Bang or God According to God for a more detailed explanation
Saw him lecture, I dunno, 15 years ago? Intriguing theory, but I doubt it will convince the pagan idolators. Might be worthwhile linking his appearances on Zola Levitt, though.
Aug '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
So, the Bible is a "living" document now, like the Constitution? And the perfectly straightforward "7 days" becomes "7 eras"? Republicans will continue to fall into this trap when they themselves force the Venn diagrams of religion and science to cross. They simply shouldn't. They are separate spheres.
Edited on November 20, 2012 at 7:41pmRe: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Matt Smith
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. · 1 hour ago
The first line of your comment reads like parody and the last paragraph is hilarious.
Christians never believed the earth was flat.
The whole notion of "flat earthers" was a myth invented by anti-Catholics a couple hundred years ago.
Educated people shouldn't spread that myth.
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Matt Smith
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. · 1 hour ago
Well, I am a media critic after all. And on that note, here's my media analysis on the topic over at GetReligion.
May '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
BrentB67: If you ask a democrat that question they will answer billions of years because the earth was created out of nothing from a big bang and there is no God. The democrat base will applaud and turn out the vote.
If a republican believes the world is several thousand years old they should say so proudly. They will be ridiculed in the press (they will be ridiculed no matter what), but I bet their base will be more inclined to rally to their cause because they took a firm, core position, and stood For something, even if it is something small. · 14 hours ago
Maybe. But the problem is that he would be taking a firm, core position on something that does not matter. I'd rather he deflect the question a la Newt, and choose his battles with care. In effect that's what he tried to do, but I would rather he had not even let the words "seven days" pass his lips.
Anyhow, it was six days. On the seventh, God rested.
May '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
If he was going to choose his battles with care he never would have agreed to the interview. Politicians pander and preen and sorry to say this is a sad example of both. I am disappointed in Mr. Rubio for setting his own trap, being unprepared for it and falling right into it. If he wants a serious interview he needs to stick to serious publications.If the election taught us anything it should be that inside-the-bubble analysis of situations like this is useless. This was a gaffe and a mistake and the ONLY thing for which the interview will be remembered.
Nov '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
And this is exactly the problem:
"Not if you want my vote, anyway." - Dan Hanson
I'm smarter than you, and I know what I know, even if you don't. And if you don't answer the way I think you should on the subject of how old the earth is, I won't vote for you. Where's my fiddle?
Mar '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Exactly. If this question had come from the NYT, we could rightfully point fingers.
But expecting editorial fairness from GQ? Really? Trace is right: Rubio's biggest gaffe was believing he would be treated fairly by a magazine that college guys read in the bathroom.
On the other hand, perhaps Rubio did know what was coming, and decided the reward was worth the costs. Who knows? A non-issue either way.
Nov '10
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
If Rubio wants young moderates to know who he is, he has no choice to but to do interviews with GQ and Vanity and those other magazines that we never read, but they do. He simply must.
Ultimately I think that for those and the left (and Dan Hanson and others who've posted here), anything other than "It's not as old as nut jobs on the religious right think it is" is confirmation that he's a nut job on the religious right. I wish he'd have said, as others have mentioned, "That question has absolutely nothing to do with our economic woes and the fact that you ask it only o republicans is evidence of your left-leaning bias. But then you know what GQ would have said? "Marco Rubio refuses to answer questions about his faith." So, damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Sep '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Faith and reason aren't two separate spheres. In fact, you need faith for reason to be useful. If you don't assume reason to be true in a leap of faith kind of way, then you have to prove it ... by reason, which of course hasn't yet been proven to be rational. According to the people who chant "faith is irrational, reason is rational," reason is irrational.
Condescension against Christians isn't a substitute for being smart. It's just a posture.
Feb '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Man is constrained by space and time... God is infinite, the beginning and the end... If scientist tell me with some level of confidence that the earth is 4.5 billion years old and the the universe is +/- 14 billion years old, I have no problem with that. The more I learn from science the more my faith in a benevolent creator is enhanced.
The problem with too many politicians, and I don't know Rubio's heart, is that they fill themselves with ambition and the pursuit of faith in their life is not a priority leaving them vulnerable to gocha questions like this.
Oct '11
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Could have been better: Probably older than my grandma, why do you ask, do you want to travel back in time ?
Edited on November 20, 2012 at 4:29pmAug '12
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
1.) Within the Church, we can reconcile no less than 3 readings of Genesis and 3 Readings of the Revelation - we may not agree with each other, but we can live with each other (all you others are still wrong, though). Why can't the GOP do so as well?
2.) Christians didn't think the earth was flat, and the reason they thought the earth was stationary was because they couldn't observe parallax in the stars until another century's improvement in telescopes - it was Galileo's theory which went against observable evidence of the time. Our ancestors weren't idiots, and we should remember that.
3.) The question is still irritating. But I don't have a good, short answer. Failing that, either attacking the question or going for honesty would seem the best choices.
4.) Was at a conference over the weekend, heard a conversation about a tenure decision - the candidate had once -20 years ago -written a paper with another biologist who once -some other time -published a paper amenable to "creationism" (might have been some variant of ID). The candidate was nearly denied tenure. This is why scientists aren't trusted by the religious.
Re: I Wish Our Candidates Didn't Feel Like They Had to Give Answers Like This
Help me with this question, if you would be so kind, Ricochetti:
Marco Rubio is a Roman Catholic (like me).
Best I know (and fix me if I'm wrong) our church has no official position on the age of the earth.
If he were to say his church has no position, followed by his having no reason to doubt the earth was created 3.5 to 4 billion years ago by God, I know he wouldn't offend any Catholics.
Would he offend other Christians to the point of their not voting for him?
I f so, help me with these questions:
Which Christians would hold that against him to that extent?
How many are there in the voting ranks?
Thanks
Edited on November 20, 2012 at 4:35pm