The Daily Caller doesn’t understand why a reporter would ask Sen. Marco Rubio if he knows the age of the Earth. They also don’t know why it could possibly matter what a politician, even a potential president, thinks about the age of the Earth. For the record, Sen. Rubio says that he isn’t a scientist and that theologians disagree about the matter so he has no opinion. Could be that the Earth was created last week, or perhaps several months ago.
The thing to do if you can’t remember the age of the planet is to use a search engine. You will immediately find your answer. This also works for discovering the atomic mass of Zinc, the diameter of Jupiter, or figuring out which day follows Tuesday. Perhaps you have forgotten the capital of Malawi or who played Chachi on Happy Days. Google or Bing can help you remember.
Marco Rubio just visited Iowa which is not something your average Cuban-American Floridian does unless he or she is planning on running for president. Why does it matter that Rubio doesn’t know or care how the old the Earth is?
Because it means he is either an idiot or a con man.
Time to stop your gloating:
Another reason to wind up doing absolutely nothing on to forestall the end of both tax cuts and the so-called “fiscal cliff”.
And another reason that Kay Hagan is toast.
Hagan was always bad news. The GOP was dumb enough to run Dole for a 2nd term. Are the N.C. Dems that crappy that she’s the best they had?
I guess Erskine Bowles wasn’t available for a re-run. Sigh. Yes, apparently the NC Dem establishment has been that crappy, which is why it’s out of power in the governors mansion and the legislature. Too must out GOPing the Republicans.
But I see the Blue Dog Mike McIntyre did manage to squeeze out a win. Whooey, another “mavericky” Dem gonna help fight against the “socialist takeover of our gub’mint”.
I can see a lot of dems surviving. For instance, I think that Steward Smalley is gonna survive, because he is really clever, and is just dynamite on the stump.
Hagan has never impressed me.
Ugh. Sen. Marco Rubio is on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee.
Does the Republican Party intentionally load committees like that with people who don’t know the difference between a theological argument and a scientific one? Or are they just really short-staffed when it comes to people who are capable of rational thought?
Republicanism is a very long-con. Doesn’t matter if their spokespersons retain rational cognitive faculties as long as when they speak, the bible-thumpers, racists, etc. respond positively.
But can Marco carry Florida?
How long was it before the MSM stopped claiming that Gore’s major failure was not carrying his home state of TN in 2000? When do they begin mentioning that R$/R didn’t carry a single state that either of them have called home (no, in 2002 R$ claimed that Utah hadn’t been his home) and R$ had so many from which to choose from. Not MA, MI, NH, CA, or WI.
So, the GOP has one ethically challenged Cuban-American as their Great Whitish Hope that their going to pimp for four years. Time for Democrats to put their twenty or so smarter and attractive “rising stars” on the national stage.
Did you see Atrios’ post this morning(in response to Boo, of all things)?
Missed that one but not the FP one at dKos. But am getting weary of the ZOMG on the left over every half-wit GOP politician that the GOP elite turns a spotlight on. All of them can be defeated with negative advertising. A less expensive way to go is to articulate and advance a progressive/liberal vision.
“Because it means he is either an idiot or a con man. “
That’s a false dilemma.
It’s neither one. It’s called being too smart to play into a libtard trap.
Example of a libtard trap:
“Senator Rubio, today is Monday. Do you know what day it will be tomorrow?”
There is just no correct answer. If he says “Saturday,” everyone will laugh at him. If he says “Tuesday” he’ll lose his chance to win the Republican nomination.
Therefore, he says, quite astutely, “Theologians disagree about the matter and I have no clue.”
Same difference.
But, but, but, why ever would a prez have to know or accept what day follows another? Or even what month comes next! Libtards don’t know that calendars differ, and there were disputes in the past! Just look at those Roman calendars! And the Mayans!
Anyway, as Rubio said, he is not a day planner or scheduling expert, for Pete’s sake! He’s just running for prez!
Yes, the days of the week are a human construct; created by sinful and imperfect creatures. There is no way that we can know the mind of god on how he wants us to name the days of the week. Or in what order we should make those days. Or even if having names for the days is really his will. All we can do is pray about it and seek his guidance. And one day when we are all caught up in the clouds and stand before his throne of judgment, only then will we have revealed to us the eternal mystery of the days of the week. Until that time, I defer, along with Mr. Rubio, in refusing to answer your silly libtard question.
“libtard trap”.
COnservaturds do not believe in truth. There is in fact a correct answer. There is truth. The correct answer is “THe earth is old. Probably more than a billion years. But I can’t say exactly, since I am not a scientist.”
Conservaturds believe that the earth’s age is roughly 6000 years old. Moron conservaturds know that saying such a thing makes them look stupid, but they cannot piss of the biblican inerrancy morons that infest the Repukeliscum party.
Geezus, repukeliscum are stupid.
Or he’s a denying science.
I love that answer, it has the aroma of bs and perfectly states that money is the only thing that matters to a republican.
I can only hope his reaction to the response he gets from that statement will be “I am not an idiot.” That would raise his popularity right up there with these greatest hits.
Also love a reporter who gives a politician a chance to really open up.
Or both. Both is clearly a possibility.
“Scientists say Wednesday, theologians say Sunday. I don’t have an opinion.”
CON MAN for $200, Alec.
“Because it means he is either an idiot or a con man.”
Logical fallacy: False dilemma.
Reason: He’s too smart to be taken in by loaded libtard question.
Ah, the conservaturd approach. Spread shit thickly over and over, and some morons will conclude that shit is the nature of the world.
I don’t buy that shit myself.
What on earth made that a “loaded libtard” question? Do you think “What do you read” was also a loaded question?
It was a perfectly reasonable question to see if he understands basic, widely accepted, scientific premises, or if he believes the bizarre distortion of the creation story into a scientific textbook.
Exactly. Let’s say I was going to have surgery and in the pre-op meeting I asked the surgeon his view on the effectiveness of blood-letting, ritual incantations and potions to treat my condition, and he said, with total sincerity, “Gosh, who knows? There are just a lot of different opinions on that and I’m not sure what to think.”
I might just have to rethink the wisdom of letting that person cut on me.
Sorry dude. Anyone who uses such a juvenile term as “libtard” gets a donut.
Is there an echo in here?
The resonance of an empty scull?
Well…yeah! That’s why he’s presidential timber, on the evidence of the last 50 years or so. If he’s an idiot…like Reagan or Bush II…then he’s got a good set of con men running him. And if he’s not? What would you call almost every president since Eisenhower w/the possible exception of Jimmy Carter and maybe Gerald Ford. (Carter was too honest and Ford was too dumb.)
One almost has to be some sort of con man (or woman) to even be seriously considered for the office.
AG
Ah yes, our fine pinhead “journalists” wonder why a “conservative” prez hopeful in 2012 has to be willing publicly to acknowledge scientific fact (otherwise know as a “libtard trap” in the vernacular of retarded wingnuts).
It’s is difficult to gauge, but I think that blithe denial of scientific reality, and outright hostility to science, scientists and empiricism, may just be starting to trip up our fine GOP circus. American “conservatives” are looking increasingly like cruel medieval bumpkins to modern thinking people, and their brazen denial of scientific fact is a chief characteristic of this.
Repubs’ plutocrat masters require that puppets like Rubio deny global warming, no matter how much indisputable evidence piles up. They now manufacture insanity about lady parts and conception that St. Thomas Aquinas would dismiss as retarded. And they have long denied evolution, as well as something as irrefutable as the goddam age of the earth.
Why? They either are personally this stupid, or they refuse to anger some interest group that demands one variety or another of Flat Eartherism be “respected”. Here the known age (4.54 billion years) of the earth must not be acknowledged by a rightwing politician for fear of alienating Christianist voters. That means that Rubio would be willing to deny other aspects of reality if they conflict with the religious beliefs of his core supporters. Is that reasonable for a prez, Daily Caller?
A modern nation built on science, and that will rely heavily on science in future, cannot have a prez that thinks science and scientific facts are mere “opinions” that one may disregard at one’s pleasure, or deploy theology against. But that’s the shit today’s Rubios are now trying to sell.
That idiots like the Daily Caller think this can be finessed as unimportant and irrelevant by candidates for high office is just tragic commentary on how far this once-advanced nation has fallen and just how many New Medievalists our Know Nothing extremist pastors have been busily (and disastrously) creating.
Rubio said:
OK, he claims to be unable to grapple with radioactive decay, what that says about geology, and cause and effect generally.
But he’s got macro economics all figured out.
He’s not stupid. He’s a grifter.
It’s a con.
I think this is more a fealty answer. I think if he were under physical duress, or one of his family members were in danger, he would immediately give up the correct answer, but in the safety of the campaign, he cannot offend his base. That is a cowardly stance. If you can’t stand up to theocrats on that issue, what will he do on a difficult topic? As for ‘theologians disagree’, Catholics have given to their scientific tendencies (Mendel) and acknowledge that “According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago ” link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution.
There is a funny extension of this. How old is the earth? 10,000 years old? Did dinosaurs exist? So humans coexisted with dinos? Have them explain the possibility of Fred Flinstone sliding down the brontosaurus neck, and you get the seriousness of their argument.
I don’t know how old the Earth is.
I would refer anyone who asked to the lastest scoop as published in the Scientific American.
I’m an old bird, and at least half what I was taught in science classes K thru 16 is not what is currently believed.
Apropos, from the comment thread at CNN on their story about who removed reference to al Qaeda from Ambassador Rice’s talking points: