“I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow”
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.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
The correct answer would have been the one found on the once respectable History Channel:
Ancient Aliens
/
Joseph Russo III on November 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM
It’s true. Taking a knife and removing portion of a baby males skin is mutilation….although it is accepted and has been for years since Abrahams time. They also sacrificed goats back then.
MoreLiberty on November 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM
I’m not a creationist, but I like his answer. I’m sick of this crap.
forest on November 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM
The proprietors of this Air of Hotness be traffic whores.
Discuss.
29Victor on November 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM
Yes, and an appendectomy is the same as a mastectomy.
29Victor on November 19, 2012 at 12:05 PM
Really? Why? Ok. A group of people set off across the universe and land on a distant planet. They terraform it and inhabit it with Earth creatures. Over millions of years that history is lost and some species evolve on a micro level. Are the scientists there correct in stating they grew out of the slime there?
The age of the earth is irreverent to evolution. Even a young earth would not preclude it as it may have happened somewhere else. Evolution is the accepted theory because that is the one which precludes a creator and that is what we have evidence for. Not because of the age of the Earth. The age of the Earth lends credence to the idea of evolution but an old earth does not make it so.
Rocks on November 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM
That’s a theory which many people believe. What’s so hard about understanding that?
I’m genuinely curious.
Paul-Cincy on November 19, 2012 at 12:07 PM
This is stupid. Everyone knows the Precursors put us here.
29Victor on November 19, 2012 at 12:07 PM
Good Lord.. We’re going have to deal with another four years of this at the very least. Fluffy non answer.
Illinidiva on November 19, 2012 at 12:08 PM
How do we know it is not the center. If you can only see to a certain distance and that distance is equal no matter which way you look you appear to be in the center. How could you prove otherwise if you cannot see a boundary?
Frank Enstine on November 19, 2012 at 12:09 PM
I agree. I believe in evolution, etc. but it is a question that is totally irrelevant to the issues (and not just economic issues) but it is always used as a “gotcha” by the left. Tiresome.
Dreadnought on November 19, 2012 at 12:09 PM
A “fluffy non-answer” is the best answer to a totally irrelevant question.
Good show, I say.
Dreadnought on November 19, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Really? So you ares saying someone who doesn’t care how old the Earth is someone is an irrational person with a personality disorder? There is nothing important or relevant about the age of the earth. It has no practical purpose outside of selling some tickets to a museum.
Rocks on November 19, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Why should he give a rock solid answer to a question that has no correct answer that humans can say is FACT? Unless you witnessed the 4.5 billion years, or God Creating and artificially aging the Earth, then you have no idea.
astonerii on November 19, 2012 at 12:11 PM
How do you feel about AGW?
29Victor on November 19, 2012 at 12:12 PM
Since space is infinite in all directions, any point and all points are the center.
But more importantly, why is anybody asking anybody else how old the world is? It’s not friggin important! The only honest anwer is 10,000 yrs. since that’s the length of human history and humans are the only important thing on this planet. Without us this might as well be Venus.
JohnBrown on November 19, 2012 at 12:15 PM
Those are a result of a condition, as such the organ must be removed in order to save the life of an individual. The only condition an infant male is born with – in relation to circumcision – is foreskin.
MoreLiberty on November 19, 2012 at 12:15 PM
Overwhelming? Can you give me a precise age of the Earth? Say, within +/- 30 days please?
Can you detail precisely how the Earth was Created?
Can you detail precisely how and when the Universe came into being?
astonerii on November 19, 2012 at 12:15 PM
Exactly. Someone tells me the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, fine, whatever. I’ll be sure to try and remember that for a game of trivia at the bar or something, but otherwise, it has no impact on my ability to make rational decisions in my business life, family life, etc.
change is for suckers on November 19, 2012 at 12:19 PM
The question is really whether Rubio is inclined to solve our countries problems in an educated way, or wait for the rapture to solve it for us.
RINOs are people too on November 19, 2012 at 12:20 PM
As astonerii points out, according to which yardstick? Ask children to measure something and even if many of them use the same measuring device, you’ll still get different answers. Evolution has flaws in its theories and findings. Scientists have problems with some of their measuring tools and standards. The earth is very old. God created it. That’s all I need to know.
Logus on November 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM
The validity of the theory of evolution has nothing to do with the age of the Earth.
They’re separate questions and fields of study. However, everything we know about the Earth’s age supports evolution, and evolution is what we would expect to see if the Earth is billions of years old.
You know this, right?
Good Lt on November 19, 2012 at 11:57 AM
Age and evolution do not have to necessarily correlate. Instead there is an assumption, an educated guess based upon bits of evidence, much of it extrapolated and circumstantial.
But again, I don’t care, so it’s not a matter of what I do or don’t know concerning the theory and practice of evolution in the field of science or discovery of atomic half life’s as a measuring stick for time.
You’ve long made up your mind about god and those of us who believe in god with disdain. Better hope you’re right.
Logus on November 19, 2012 at 12:20 PM
LOL…hahaha…the fact that the earth can be measured and tracked against other objects. That big bright ball of fire in the sky is called the sun…and the earth revolves around it taking just over 365-days. That sun, along with its planets, is called a solar system and it is among billions of other stars just within the milky-way galaxy. LOL..OMG
MoreLiberty on November 19, 2012 at 12:21 PM
Somebody who believes the earth is 6000 years old is not a rational person.
Pablo Honey on November 19, 2012 at 12:21 PM
How about just saying it was created billions of years ago and then pointing out how it is irrelevant to Marco Rubio’s job?
Illinidiva on November 19, 2012 at 12:21 PM
Exactly. I love that the ring we’re asked to kiss is the “4.5Bn year” age of the earth, as if that were the answer to life, the universe and everything.
TexasDan on November 19, 2012 at 12:22 PM
Per relativity, something I am sure you are a fond believer in, everything is measured from the vantage point of the observer.
Thus, a person in a rocket moving at near the speed of light still sees light moving at the speed of light. Two people moving towards each other at near the speed of light, when witnessed from each vantage point sees the other moving at no more than the speed of light. These things are contrary to physical realities.
Explain again how the Earth, our vantage point is not the center of the relativity universe!
astonerii on November 19, 2012 at 12:25 PM
the Earth was created from the dust, gases and rock particles that were banging around and coming together in the area we know call our solar system.
The Sun came to be from the majority of this material and as it rotated it caused the rest of the material to turn into a sort of disk around it (that’s why everything in the system is on the same “plane” more or less). Parts of the disk came together to form the various planets, comets, asteroids, moons and other things in the solar system.
At first the Earth was nothing but a giant fireball of molten rock which spent most of its days getting bombarded with asteroids and comets.
Then as things settled down and the planets settled into their orbits the Earth began to cool.
All of this took more than a few thousand years definitely.
I don’t know how the Universe came into being and I don’t know what it “expands” over to get bigger. I don’t know what caused the “big bang” if that’s what is responsible for the creation of the Universe.
I don’t know if there is more than one Universe.
This is why I believe in a creator because something can not come from nothing.
Joseph Russo III on November 19, 2012 at 12:26 PM
Actually, yes they might be. What you consider to be an irrational belief has no bearing on the overall rationality of a person in other areas of life and decision-making. I’m sure you consider yourself a rational person, despite your belief in your superior intellect to all others who believe contrary to you, yes?
change is for suckers on November 19, 2012 at 12:26 PM
Same.
ButterflyDragon on November 19, 2012 at 12:27 PM
Someone who thinks the Earth can be dated to precisely 4.5 billion years is also not a rational person.
Kind of like a person who thinks increasing a trace gas in the atmosphere that has been dozens of times higher in the past, by a simple doubling will cause the Earth to become uninhabitable is also not Rational. That person was Romney by they way.
astonerii on November 19, 2012 at 12:27 PM
Really? Then it would be impossible for such a person to perform any sort of practical science correct? Let alone perform such a job as becoming a politician. They probably couldn’t even feed themselves.
Rocks on November 19, 2012 at 12:29 PM
So should we cut the foreskin at the at its longest point and leave it about 18 inches long?
What is the proper length for foreskin?
We need to start a commission on Foreskin length. Pronto.
portlandon on November 19, 2012 at 12:30 PM
well I would say that because the Solar System is on the outer edge of the Milky Way galaxy and the Milky Way galaxy is just one of billions of galaxies it would be difficult to say that the Earth is at the center of the universe if it isn’t even close to the center of its home galaxy.
But I do see your point.
Its like when laying out a football field in a sandlot your friend stands across with a cone (to mark the goal line) and asks you “is this line straight?” Well, every line is straight according to where you are standing.
Joseph Russo III on November 19, 2012 at 12:31 PM
The problem with that question is that a believer will tell you they are instructed not to sit around and wait for the rapture, and to live each day in a productive manner. So, even if he believes in the Biblical text concerning a rapture, he likely wouldn’t sit around waiting for it to happen based on his belief in other portions of the Bible. Your logic assumes that all Christians who believe the book of Revealation simply sit around waiting for the rapture and make no effort to live their daily lives, which you know is not true.
change is for suckers on November 19, 2012 at 12:31 PM
Tinfoil hats at the ready, boys! The Hot Air Conspiracy Group is in session. Topic of discussion: How the Science Cabal got the Pope to endorse EVILution.
ZachV on November 19, 2012 at 12:33 PM
That is a good explanation of how I see the Solar System formed. But we cannot date things precisely, and since we cannot, a person should not be saying the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, that is just simply the date of a single rock formation plus some arbitrary amount of time to allow the Earth to cool. Arbitrary being the defining word here, a best guess with no basis in reality other than a hunch. I also believe the Earth is billions of years old, probably significantly more than 4.5 billion. But I would not stake my position on a singular date. That is pretty much all I have been saying.
astonerii on November 19, 2012 at 12:34 PM
we can not date things precisely but there is no way that the process that formed the solar system and therefore the Earth began only a thousand years ago.
Its just not possible given the distance over which the forming material was spread over and the time needed to amass planets and the sun.
Joseph Russo III on November 19, 2012 at 12:37 PM
As a Catholic I would doubt he is waiting on the Rapture.
Rocks on November 19, 2012 at 12:37 PM
should be: thousands of years ago.
Joseph Russo III on November 19, 2012 at 12:39 PM
Yes HoneyBonBon, but who is less rational?
Astonerii COMPLETE ignores the facts in order to regurgitate some tired point refutes science with word games. Pablo Honey is being honest.
Paul Ryan loves Rage against the Machine. Zack de la Rocha sings “Fear is your only God” in Vietnow.
Capitalist Hog on November 19, 2012 at 12:40 PM
which is also inaccurate
The Earth’s formation definitely happened thousands of years ago. The question is how many thousands.
Capitalist Hog on November 19, 2012 at 12:43 PM
It’s “affect”, morons at GQ.
Schadenfreude on November 19, 2012 at 12:46 PM
As an evolutionist I like this answer. The question is irrelevant.
Ted Torgerson on November 19, 2012 at 12:47 PM
Why does this matter? For one thing. Look at the Asian American vote. That’s a community that is decidedly pro-science (in no small part due to their large share of employment within the sciences).
But outside of electoral strategy, it matters *immensely* if a President values science, values the scientific process and does not believe that faith should elevate above the scientific process. If you value your faith over science, that is fine, but if you’re running for President voters who care about a leader who is going to be bold in using the state to support scientific advancement have a right to know how you feel on the issue one way or another. It isn’t a “gotcha” question, its a question that reveals whether a person invests in science or not. It is, in fact, a values question.
libfreeordie on November 19, 2012 at 12:47 PM
The article is about much more.
GQ is totally in the azz of Obama.
Schadenfreude on November 19, 2012 at 12:48 PM
Interesting or odd?
Capitalist Hog on November 19, 2012 at 12:51 PM
Yes, all the other communities are so anti-science. They should be like the Asians who who totally discount things like Astrology.
Rocks on November 19, 2012 at 12:51 PM
I think I answered that statement in my answer. I think the Earth is far older than 4.5 billion years.
astonerii on November 19, 2012 at 12:52 PM
You’re a clown. Stop citing phony demographics. You’re stereotyping and failing miserably at it.
Totally.
Capitalist Hog on November 19, 2012 at 12:53 PM
So aside the simple suggestion that basing one’s worldview upon text book facts are the basis of rational thought, you’ve got nothing to suggest that ability to run a country has a relationship to regurgitating text book facts when asked by an interviewer.
What scientific facts point to the a definition of “rational” thought?
For the “conservatives” who think that there is a direct correlation between the two, you’ve already got your party waiting for you. The question by GQ attempts to appeal to that segment of the population that believe this simple model to be true.
You have to wonder why you’re on the same political side as us dummies who don’t believe regurgitation of text book facts are the core competence of intelligent people?
Axeman on November 19, 2012 at 12:53 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »