Marco Rubio doesn't know how old the Earth is

[Ladewig]

deleted by user

 

[RandFan]

deleted by user
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx

 

[Ladewig]

When it comes to creationism, there isn't all that much difference between the two parties' supporters.

Among Republicans, 58% believe God created humans as they are today, 10,000 years ago. Among the "reality-based" Democrats, it's 41%. There is no difference at all when it comes to the creationism-light theory that humans evolved but God guided that evolution; about a third of each party believes that.

Of course this thread isn't about the supporters.

In May 2007, three out of ten Republican-primary presidential candidates publicly admitted that they do not believe in evolution. Come to think of it, I think there were three or four this year that went on record as saying that some form of Intelligent Design was appropriate for science classes in public schools.

 

[uke2se]

Of course this thread isn't about the supporters.

In May 2007, three out of ten Republican-primary presidential candidates publicly admitted that they do not believe in evolution. Come to think of it, I think there were three or four this year that went on record as saying that some form of Intelligent Design was appropriate for science classes in public schools.

As I recall, all but one (Romney) of the Republican primary candidates claimed to believe in creationism.

 

[maxpower1227]

When it comes to creationism, there isn't all that much difference between the two parties' supporters.

Among Republicans, 58% believe God created humans as they are today, 10,000 years ago. Among the "reality-based" Democrats, it's 41%. There is no difference at all when it comes to the creationism-light theory that humans evolved but God guided that evolution; about a third of each party believes that.

So the fact that Republicans are almost 50% more likely than Democrats to believe in Creationism, and that Democrats and Independents are 4x as likely to believe that humans evolved with no input from a god, represents "no difference" to you? The numbers are embarrassing in both cases, but let's not try to pretend that one side isn't far more likely to believe in this particular form of nonsense (and, as others have pointed out, far more likely to try to legislate their nonsensical beliefs).

 

[maxpower1227]

As I recall, all but one (Romney) of the Republican primary candidates claimed to believe in creationism.

Huntsman expressed acceptance of evolution and global warming early on. You can be forgiven for forgetting though, given how quickly he was cast aside.

Say, Brainster, would a Democratic primary candidate who expressed acceptance of evolution and climate change be booted out of the race as quickly as Huntsman was? I know how the parties are basically identical when it comes to their science denial.

 

[Olowkow]

As I recall, all but one (Romney) of the Republican primary candidates claimed to believe in creationism.

Strange, because that's what I remembered too, but I looked for the video, and sure enough, (kind of blurry) but only 3 of them raised their hands when asked, "Who does not believe in evolution".

 

[Peephole]

2016 is going to be just as awesome as 2008 and 2012.

 

[maxpower1227]

Strange, because that's what I remembered too, but I looked for the video, and sure enough, (kind of blurry) but only 3 of them raised their hands when asked, "Who does not believe in evolution".

That was in 2008, when those who fessed up to their Creationism were (IIRC) Sam Brownback, Tom Tancredo and Mike Huckabee. Of course, that was before the advent of the TEA Party; I wonder how many would have raised their hands if they knew they had that rabid nuthouse to pander to.

 

[angrysoba]

Actually, not knowing how old the Earth is isn't Earth-shatteringly bad.

The bit that obviously demonstrates his pandering and his political views, despite his protestations, is this:

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.

Really? All theories of how the universe was created should be given an airing? I think there are some theories that even he wouldn't accept. Besides, I would think that students' opportunities to a proper education in which the correct theory is taught should be a higher priority than the opportunity of any old crank who wants to teach his theory.

 

[angrysoba]

When it comes to creationism, there isn't all that much difference between the two parties' supporters.

Among Republicans, 58% believe God created humans as they are today, 10,000 years ago. Among the "reality-based" Democrats, it's 41%.

Well, two thirds and two fifths are not equal. Except in classrooms where anyone is given the opportunity to teach their version of arithmetic.

But as someone said upthread, both statistics are pretty shocking.

 

[Davidlpf]

2016 is going to be just as awesome as 2008 and 2012.

Oh please let the MAyans be right.

 

[Dcdrac]

we all know the earth came into existance 3,123 years ago at tea time precisly

 

[Beerina]

Well, two thirds and two fifths are not equal. Except in classrooms where anyone is given the opportunity to teach their version of arithmetic.

But as someone said upthread, both statistics are pretty shocking.

A little under three fifths and a little over two fifths is a little closer than the fractions you selected. Leave it to the libertarian, AKA the political as well as religious atheist, to give an even more accurate assessmemt of reality.

Many religious folk are at the apologist stage, believing in evolution with tweaks by God. That's some progress.

Many leftists recognize the power of freedom-based capitalism, and just want to harness it "properly". That's some progress.

 

[uke2se]

A little under three fifths and a little over two fifths is a little closer than the fractions you selected. Leave it to the libertarian, AKA the political as well as religious atheist, to give an even more accurate assessmemt of reality.

Many religious folk are at the apologist stage, believing in evolution with tweaks by God. That's some progress.

Many leftists recognize the power of freedom-based capitalism, and just want to harness it "properly". That's some progress.

Libertarianism is to politics what atheism is to religion?

 

[RandFan]

Many leftists recognize the power of freedom-based capitalism, and just want to harness it "properly". That's some progress.

Righteous mind thinking. There really are very, very few people who don't understand the benefits of capitalism. Most people on the left don't have a religious like dogma that holds that capitalism is sacrosanct. No, instead they understand that there are trade offs. Too little regulation and over sight and you get banking scandals, oligarchies and monopolies. Too much and you stifle growth. The red flag for the GOP perspective on less regulation is that there is no objective standard for how much regulation we should have. The meme is "less regulation". It's a GOP myth that folks on the left don't understand the economic engine that is capitalism.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

we all know the earth came into existance 3,123 years ago at tea time precisly

But of course on that day, the Creator hadn't yet separated the tea from the china.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

...and Obama doesn't understand basic economics, so I guess it's a wash.

Does Obama believe things about economics that aren't true? Not defer to economic experts? Insist on equal time for incorrect economics to be taught in class?

Oh, and your assertion is just an assertion.

 

[TimCallahan]

...and Obama doesn't understand basic economics, so I guess it's a wash.

Except, as POTUS, Obama is going to cause a lot more damage.

Of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of this thread. If you wish to talk about this subject it's easy enough to start your own thread. The subject of this thread is the disturbing willingness of politicians to pander to the ideologies of their supporters, mouthing all kinds of nonsense to get votes. While Rubio's views on the age of the earth may not have much to do with national policy (other than its impact on education) his views on global warming seem to be likewise determined by such pandering (from the site, emphasis added):

4. Global Warming and Environmental issues: In a 2010 February interview with a Florida newspaper, Rubio stated that "I don't think there's the scientific evidence to justify climate change." Rubio has strongly opposed the implementation of a cap and trade system and has called for increased drilling in environmentally sensitive areas such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

 

[dudalb]

He's not even taking a position on the issue- instead he spouted typical politician nonsense. It's even worse than if he were a YEC himself, because I get the impression that he knows better but he dares not offend his superstitious base.

Agreed: Classic example of a Politician avoiding a controvesial issue whilt trying to look like he is not avoiding a controvesial issue.