By Dan Merica and Eric Marrapodi, CNN
Washington (CNN) – Florida Sen. Marco Rubio attempted to walk the line between science and faith-based creationism in remarks that that have provoked the ire of liberal blogs, leaving the door open to creationism in responding to a recent question about the age of the Earth.
When GQ’s Michal Hainey asked Rubio, in an interview released Monday, “How old do you think the Earth is,” the rising Republican star described the debate about the planet’s age as “one of the great mysteries.”
“I'm not a scientist, man,” Rubio told the interviewer. “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.”
“Whether the Earth was created in seven days, or seven actual eras,” Rubio continued, “I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.”
Most scientists agree that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old and the universe is 14.5 billion years old. Christian Young Earth Creationists, on the other hand, argue that the weeklong account of God creating the Earth and everything in it represents six 24-hour periods (plus one day of rest) and date the age of the Earth between 6,000 and 10,000 years.
Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter
Left-leaning blogs and sites like ThinkProgress and Huffington Post jumped on Rubio’s comments, with the Zack Beauchamp from ThingProgress writing, “To suggest we can’t know how old the Earth is, then, is to deny the validity of these scientific methods altogether — a maneuver familiar to Rubio, who also denies the reality of anthropogenic climate change.”
Rubio is regarded as a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2016, though the senator says his visit last week to Iowa, home of the first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses, had “nothing to do with 2016.”
His response to GQ’s age of the Earth query has also provoked questions about his political aspirations. Dave Weigel of Slate writes, “How can you read that and not think ‘Iowa’? ” The state is the first to hold a presidential caucus in 2016.
Forty-six percent of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years, according to a survey released by Gallup in June. That number has remained unchanged for the past 30 years, since 1982, when Gallup first asked the question on creationism versus evolution.
CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories
The second most common view is that humans evolved with God's guidance - a view held by 32% of respondents. The view that humans evolved with no guidance from God was held by 15% of respondents.
The Gallup poll has not specifically asked about views on the age of the Earth.
Rubio attends a Baptist church in southern Florida but also considers himself “a practicing Catholic.”
He was born Catholic, but his family converted to Mormonism when Rubio was 8 years old, according to Rubio’s recent memoir. The family left its LDS faith behind when it moved from Nevada back to Florida and Rubio was confirmed in the Catholic Church.
Catholic teaching is that science and faith are not at odds with one another and it is possible to believe what scientists say about the Earth’s age and in God. But many evangelical churches, including Baptist ones, promote a version of creationism.
When CNN reached out to Rubio’s Baptist church in Florida on Monday, a person answering the phone would not comment on its teachings about the Earth’s age and said that a church representative was unlikely to be available in the near term.
During the GQ interview, Rubio argued that “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.”
For the past 30 years, the “equal-time argument” –- the idea that Creationism taught alongside evolution -– has been popular method for Creationists to advance their cause. In the late 1980s, some state legislatures passed bills that promoted the idea of a balanced treatment of both ideas in the classroom.
In 1987, the issue made it all the way to the Supreme Court, where a Louisiana "equal-time law" was struck down. The court ruled that teaching creationism in public school classrooms was a violation of the Establishment Cause in the Constitution, which is commonly referred to as the separation of church and state.
First off, " provoked the ire of liberal blogs", I can assure you that it's not just liberals who care about science.
Second, please don't describe this as a debate. Usually in a debate, even when one side is clearly representing a more valid argument, the other side generally has one or two good arguments. The most obvious example of this is the abortion debate, in which pro-choice is evidently more valid, yet some pro lifers aren't completely deluded and have some valid points. However, there is no debate with evolution, you either accept it or you're retarded.
They will never accept it.
Doing so opens them up to questioning even more of their absurd fairy tale.
It also means going against their family and friends.
The only thing we can hope for is more of their kids escape the brainwashing and move away from religion.
They will eventually die off and their rented atoms will be put to some better use.
Ah, don't you just love someone laying down an absolute in a world that just doesn't believe in them? Believe or you are retarded. Delicious.
I am amazed on how much trust you can put into a system that is far from perfect and is constantly changing (redefining) itself and what it teaches. Believing something because someone told you (or you read) that someone else proved it. Sorry, I like to see evidence firsthand or see clear reasoning based on evidence that i've seen firsthand, before I check it off as true.
As far as I am concerned, if no one was present to serve as an eyewitness then there is always doubt because the 'truth' given by the experts is merely conjecture, however well reasoned it seems.
AH Jonathan THAT is why you are retarded.
The scientific process is just that, a PROCESS. It involves the process of experimentation, which involves the ability to REPLICATE upon demand the findings previously described. THAT is why it is NOTHING like what you say.
" Believing something because someone told you (or you read) that someone else proved it. Sorry, I like to see evidence firsthand or see clear reasoning based on evidence that i've seen firsthand, before I check it off as true."
You sure can check their evidence anytime you wish. It is NOT like religion where you have to trust the retard who tells you that some guy came down with tablets from Gawd.
Science is reproducible.
Religion is a sign of mental dysfunction.
"Science is reproducable"
Exactly. Now, how is it that we've managed to 'reproduce' the results of eons past to confirm and 'prove' we known the age of the universe or the origins of life? Everything that we think we 'know' about the unrecorded and unwitnessed past is merely interpretations and conjecture based how one chooses to look at the only evidence that we have. A few hundred years of 'observations' does not prove anything in the gran scheme of things, especially when we claim the universe is 'billions' of years old.
What Jonathan is trying to say is just because all available evidence and repeatable science points to a certain conclusion, that doesn't 100% make it true. Just because a child is standing next to the pie tin with berries all over their hands and face doesn't 100% mean that he ate any of the pie... there's always a chance that the guilty party just smeared the berries on the child and then ran away before anyone could notice him...
All good lie's begin with that kernel of doubt. Even though we know the constant speed of light and can measure how far a distance it would have to travel to reach us doesn't mean God didn't just create the light in transit, right? Just takes that kernel of doubt to refute anything...is Jonathan male? Are you sure? Do we even exist? How do you know? Is water really wet? Is Ice cold? How sure are you...? But in the end all rational persons who are willing to accept that we do not live in Narnia, must accept that the approximate age of the earth is 4.5 billion years old.
Technically, we do not know the constant speed of light. All we have been able to measure is how long it takes light to leave and return through a set of mirrors in close proximity to one another. Being able to measure the one way speed of light is beyond our current abilities as we can't account for any time displacement created by our shift in location. For example, why do clocks run faster the higher you go in elevation and why do we have to adjust the clocks on satellites so they don't continually get ahead?
The 'truth' is, we are assuming that light works that same way everywhere as it does on earth and base our measurements on that. We assume that all of redshift is caused by objects moving away from us at a quick speed. There are heavily redshifted objects between us and lesser redshifted objects in the night sky.
All I am getting at is: we only have observations and interpretations to go off of when it comes to things we can't experiment with or reproduce. You can infer all you want but that doesn't make you correct. Calling someone a 'retard' because they don't agree with your interpretation of observational phenomenom is redundant and a bit hyprocritical. This is why we are losing critical thinking skills and the motivation to challenge existing ideas.
Johnathon you said this: "For example, why do clocks run faster the higher you go in elevation and why do we have to adjust the clocks on satellites so they don't continually get ahead?"...the clocks run faster COMPARED to clocks on the surface because the further away from the core gravity of the earth the faster time runs in comparison to surface time in outer space.
At least thats how I understand it...the other thing is...science constantly evaluates the data and makes adjustments accordingly...whereas religious dogma does not!
Oh and Johnathon we DO know the speed of light accurately!" The speed of light in vacuum, commonly denoted c, is a universal physical constant important in many areas of physics. Its value is 299,792,458 metres per second, a figure that is exact because the length of the metre is defined from this constant and the international standard for time"
Thanks for the additional information but it was unnecessary. I am aware why there appears to be a time difference. I was merely using it as an example to support my comments. Additionally, the clocks run faster because the machines that house the clocks are moving at a greater rate of speed than those on the surface of the earth (ie, mountains too, since their peaks are higher). It has to do with the Law of General Relativity and how time appears when an object's speed approaches the speed of light (ie, time seems to slow down around it while it moves at the same rate of speed. Its clock runs normally while everything else is slower.). The speed is no where near the speed of light for our satellites but there is a difference and it adds up.
We should not really broach the subject of religion unless we isolate it to a particular theology and set defined areas to debate over, using the direct and original materials to reference and argue over. I am well aware of the inadequancies of the many religions in the world and only have specialized knowledge in a few. We are doing just fine keeping this to a strictly scientific debate, rather than trying to complicate things with another subject.
If desired, I can respond but I will not answer questions solely. I will require a response to my own questions so that it doesn't turn into a rapid fire queston storm where someone is just trying to get me to stumble and use that to prove my argument invalid.
Once again, I reaffirm that we DO NOT know the ONE WAY speed of light and I did offer an explanation as to why. All the test we've down with light have been on earth (or in near earth orbit) and only using reflected light through multiple mirrors.
I'm not sure I agree with your statement. There is no doubt that the universe has a 4.5 billion year old record. But since humans have not a good explanation for how the universe was designed they have to extrapolate. The idea that the universe was created by a God is a rational extrapolation. The idea that a God with the power to create the universe also has the power to create in it a historical record is also a rational extrapolation. I'm not saying I agree with this view, but it's grounds for a debate.
"There is no doubt that the universe has a 4.5 billion year old record"
If there was no doubt, there would be no argument. The 4.5 billion year age is only a number assigned to the earth because of the current model used to extrapolate the evidence doesn't make sense without it. It has been constantly adjusted as new 'evidence' has forced it to change or be disproven. Even the 'tests' that are run to prove this number are based on an understanding that the earth is old and no other option is valid (radioactive decay).
However, I am glad to see someone with an open mind that is willing to suspend belief in order to have a civil and constructive debate. My hat off to you, Matt.
@ There are lots of things that scientists believe based on rational thought that are traceable back to reproducible experimentats that can't in themselves be reproduced. We can include everything in history that happened before we were born. For example, was Lincoln assassinated? Was Lincolln President? Was there a Roman empire? Does the earth revolve around the Sun? (Be careful here religious zeolots burned people at the stake for giving the wrong answer to this.)
Lincoln being assassinated and the Roman empire are facts of history. The evidence for them are based in eyewitness accounts that have been preserved as time passed (many bible enthusiasts will claim that the bible is also one of the same). None of those events were 'experiments'. Many people have trouble seperating operational science (that gives us computers and flight) from historical science, since the public school system generally doesnt seperate the two. This is generally learned in higher education when one decides to specialize in a science.
As for the earth revolving around the sun, we have observations that show this happening year after year. Its repeatable and consistant. As for the 'burning people' you mentioned, that was when the catholic church allowed for the secular belief of the sun orbiting the earth to pervade its teaching, similiar to how it is today. Allowing 'evolution through natural selection and adaptation' is merely the first step. The bible teaches neither.
"As far as I am concerned, if no one was present to serve as an eyewitness then there is always doubt because the 'truth' given by the experts is merely conjecture, however well reasoned it seems."
Then why do you believe your god created the earth in 6 days and that Jesus died on the cross? There aren't any credible witnesses to either event.
And by the way, Jonny, learn to spell. It's "consistent." It's "separating."
I don't care how well-versed you are; when you can't be bothered to spell simple words correctly, you look ignorant.
Voice of reason.
I already spoke about keeping this to a strictly scientific standpoint, rather than dragging religion into it. Perhaps you chose to ignore it or merely skimmed over it while looking for weak areas to attack my opinion (like minor spelling errors). Half measures and nit-picking only serve to make you look ignorant, not me. If past history serves as an example, I expect you to followup with name calling and further insults. Please, spare us this time and keep things civil.
But, regarding your question. Many Christians believe that God is a credible eye-witness and his testimony was written down by Moses. There were many credible eye-witnesses to the crucifixion of Jesus, namely the apostle that were there. Jewish history was of a verbal tradition and they took great lengths to perserve every aspect of their stories. Regardless, the testimony of the apostle were written down within 30-45 years of Jesus' death and even Greek and Roman historians wrote about this event. Whether you deem this credible or not, that is your perogative but it seems quite adequate for most professional historians.
I am not sure what you mean by 'Voice of Reason'.
Our Beef Tenderloin is incredibly tender and flavorful. Served with slow cooked potatoes and a fresh, crisp salad. Our crisp greens are sprinkled with beautiful, jewel-like pomegranate seeds and drizzled with a poppy seed dressing. This is the kind of comfort food that will take you back in time. All the way back to the Iron Age, you know, like Christians! $9.99
now we're talkin'!
You have very reasonable prices...
According to book of potted plants Fern sim, sun light ism, Green thumb, seed labels, potted plants oxygen loving Fertilizer sprouted in to new blooms else on front of tree parasite, at last rainfall Fertilizer looked at Sun lamp and smiled and growth was answered by Sun lamp, Fertilizer kissed soil, Fertilizer turned in to Sun lamp, and Sun lamp turned in to Fertilizer, ONE ON windlow shelf WAS NOT FERTILIZER BUT SUN LAMP, EVERY potted plants, hippie follower of potted plants Fern ism, sun light ism waters to as his Fern, sun light man potted plant. Visit GreenThumb.com to learn potted plantsism, partial light of grow lamp absolute plant food, by potted plants parasites.
...and though they grieved and rent their clothes, it was in the pub the followers gathered for darts and dark ale which they hoisted in sadness and drank with great sorrow. Many libations they consumed and they called it the blood of the son of God.
Oy!!! Drinking my blood???? Was "Twilight" around back then?
I am gonna have a few drops of the good stuff and throw darts tonight! :)
Day of cow chip throwing contest, absurdity celebrated by Oklahomans, ignorants to seek trophy from poop long horn filthy beast, source of rodeo lasso displayed on belt buckle of every cowboy, ignorant female calf ropers of cow chip throwing contest, illegality of opening shoot early To learn cow chip throwing contest, absurdity of oklahomans, goat ropers please visit nationalfinalsrodeo.com filthy cow chip ism.
Creepy hindu guy, you are boring us again.
Please go away, we don't like you.
now I am sad niknak
Our Beef Tenderloin is incredibly tender and flavorful. Served with slow cooked potatoes and a fresh, crisp salad. Our crisp greens are sprinkled with beautiful, jewel-like pomegranate seeds and drizzled with a poppy seed dressing. This is the kind of comfort food that will take you back in time. All the way back to the Iron Age, you know, like Christians! $10.99
That is nice.
Rubio is an embarrassment to not only the republican party, but to REAL Americans.
Rubio just showed he is NOT the man for 2016. The next person who has any hope of reaching the sane part of the party will not say that crap. Rubio is trying to out tea-tard the other crazies, and that is NOT what the GOP is in need of now, so he obviously listened to bad advice and has now done himself a Bobby Jindal. He is passe.
@KRHODES....LOL...Uh, yeah, delusions of grandeur have nothing to do with your latest, greatest failure, Romney that belongs to a religion that believes that they will become gods? YOU right-wingers LET him run! You wing-nuts put him there so don't be a hypocrite. You're just a sore loser like the rest of your mentally challenged ilk.
It never ceases to amaze me how backward the average republican/fundie is.
Even after the overwhelming scientific evidence show just how old the earth is, they still cling onto their stone age book of fairy tales.
Please die off as fast as possible you repub fundies.
I hate to inform you of this niknak but the age of the universe is irrelevant to the validity of the Bible given the Bible does not specifically state the age of the universe or the earth for that matter. Of course you realize the article states most scientist "agree" with the age but that is no way means they know...because i doubt very seriously anyone does.
I agree, KRHODES, the bible is too stupid to be believed for all sorts of other reasons. For example, the order of "creation" is laughable.
Scientists have the age of the universe within a few percentage points of it's actual age, which is about 14.5 billion years old.
The Earth is about 4 billion years old, the Sun about 5.
The babble has no age, as the untold thousands of scribes who have rewritten it over the eons had zero idea of what the universe of the sun was, much less the ages of them.
You can keep clinging onto your stone age myth, but it won't make it ever come true.
And by the way, we are still waiting for you or any of your religious friends to provide us with any kind of evidence of your sky fairy.
In fact, us non believers have been waiting for literally thousands of years.
"And by the way, we are still waiting for you or any of your religious friends to provide us with any kind of evidence of your sky fairy.
In fact, us non believers have been waiting for literally thousands of years."
Ah...so you do not have enough evidence to persuade you? Why what would that evidence be since you seem to think there is something that would convince you?
"I agree, KRHODES, the bible is too stupid to be believed for all sorts of other reasons. For example, the order of "creation" is laughable."
You know...as far as the order of creation...some reading comprehension skills would go a long way in helping you understand your problem with the creation account contained in Genesis.
What a common cop-out.
"Present your evidence"
"Well what would convince you?"
Tell me, does it really matter KRHODES? If you think you have evidence, then present it and stop running in circles.
Legit evidence must be measurable/testable. It's the reason that I often say god's existence is irrelevant. If there's nothing to measure, then there's nothing to consider. It's the belief that does the "work" everyone is so hot about. Belief in a particular version of the Koran is what motivated the 9/11 suicide terrorists, and it's the belief that I take issue with.
"Scientists have the age of the universe within a few percentage points of it's actual age, which is about 14.5 billion years old."
So if they know the actual age then why would they be within "a few percentage points?" That really does not make sense, but nothing that an atheist believes makes much sense.
As if anything a fundie says makes sense. What a moron you are, KHRUDDY.
Considering you don't know anything about science, I'm not surprised it doesn't make sense to you.
"Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son
As if anything a fundie says makes sense. What a moron you are, KHRUDDY."
Nice adhominem attack tommy...i suppose when you really have no argument then you must must resort to all you know...good luck with that.
Oh, get over yourself, KHRUD. You don't have a leg to stand on.
If you did you'd use it to kick all of us. You're a lame-azz loser.
The BUYBULL is irrelevant to anything in reality. To even put it on a stage of having to rate it relevance is laughable. It is the worst book ever cobbled togehter by unknown authors over multiple millenia, so its relevance is nil.
@KRHODES Evidence for accepting supernatural would be repeatable, measurable, verifiable violation of any and all known natural laws demonstrated at will by the religious person of your choice (doesn't even have to be Christian). A simple, immediate supernatural response to a prayer would probably do. Like "God, let the sun be blotted out" (when no eclipse is expected or predicted, etc.) and "OK, God, you can give us back the sun now". I would be in church in a heartbeat.
There is NO way on earth that Rubio would be a possible Presidential candidate for 2016 if he is as stupid as he is now. In 2016 religion will be even more distant as President Obama leads us into a new era. When will the republicans get a clue???
Some of the younger ones probably are getting a clue, but they can't do anything until the old guard is flushed out. That'll take a few more election cycles to do.
When president Obama leads us into a new era? I think delusions of grandeur usually accompany mental disorders such as liberalism.
KRHODES. Pot Kettle Black. You believe in imaginary creatures and you call other people delusional!
@Khrudd: "I think...blah, blah y blah."
You don't think at all. About anything. You're an idiot.
Without religion people behave like and devolve into animals. I don't personally believe in God but I'm grateful that most of the population is deluded. The world would be awful if it was Godless. It is slowly becoming that way and we'll all get a chance to see just how grotesque the human spirit can be.
@Matt Wow, you haven't been around very many atheists... or righteous, angry religions persons. Even chimpanzees have morals. We are born with morals. It is part of our evolutionary heritage. Religion is just a way of organizing (and sometimes distorting) our built-in moral behavior.
I know there are stupid and ignorant people, but, I never suspected that a full 85% of the population was that stupid and ignorant.
Yeah, that's really hard to swallow. We truly are a bunch of cretins, on average at least. We just need better science teachers in our classrooms.
Everyone is ignorant of something. No one knows everything.
Secondly. half of the people are below average intelligence.
We HAVE good science teachers in MANY of our classrooms. What we DON'T have is many good students who actually have a work ethic and parents who don't think their kid is ent itled to an A just for showing up with a full set of perfectly straightened teeth and breathing.
Half the people are below the median in intelligence. That is not necessarily the average.
It's that and the fact that many of the good students are instructed by their parents to ignore their lessons in science when it comes to their faith. So you have good students making A's on their science tests but not "believing" in much of it. It's truly sad.
Wonder how many are just convenient christians, because they were baptised or that is what their family wants. Hard to get a job at Chik-A-Fil if you put in your application you are gay or atheist, being christian is often a little white lie.
I'm sure that's a good part of the problem. Peer pressure, we could call it. As religion fades more and more "closet atheists" will come out. But it will take a while. Nobody wants to be a small minority, it's just not the popular position.
You may be right, Moby. I just don't see much emphasis by the current generation of parents on effort, work, struggle, etc. Education should be easy, fun, painless and rewarding, according to much of the current thinking among the UMC.
You accurately describe the biggest problem I deal with everyday as an educator, Tom, Tom. It's extremely frustrating. No matter how much I wish you were wrong, you're right.
I'm sorry, MS. I can only hope that there will someday be a crisis that will propel the powers-that-be to get off their collective azzes and do something to right the ship before it sinks....
@Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son; "I'm sorry, MS. I can only hope that there will someday be a crisis that will propel the powers-that-be to get off their collective azzes and do something to right the ship before it sinks...."
Rest assured, that day is most certainly rapidly approaching only it is not going to be going the direction that you think.
Yeah, I'm sure YOU'RE much better informed. NOT. You boob. You don't have a clue what will occur.
Get bent, fvckwit.
I have a difficult time believing the 15% statistic... I have an extremely diverse group of friends from many circles and I have found that, after they know I am an atheist (which is not something I go around advertising – although I will occasionally break out the "If you don't sin, Jesus died for nothing" t-shirt), they also admit that they don't believe, or at the very least have serious reservations. I would say this has turned out to be about 50/50. Whether or not this is a valid representation of the general public in my area (and I live in VA which is generally considered to be a "southern" state) or I have just gotten lucky ;) is certainly open for debate. I would like to believe it is the latter but the surveys would indicate otherwise. Regardless, I feel like 15% (of the US population that believes humans came about through natural processes) is a rather low number. Once polls get up to 20-25% in this category, I have a feeling it will grow exponentially as people begin to realize they are not alone in their disbelief.
It is the WILLFULLY ignorant that bother the rest of us matter of fact ignorants. Of course no one knows everything, but those that willfully stay stupid and ignorant are dangers to themselves and society at large. They should be corralled and placed in Arkansas, with a fence around the state and paid admission to go so the crazies in their wild habitat. Let them all carry guns and kill themselves in search of food, since their Obectivist leanings are an individual every one for themself mentality, which they will not recognize goes against their BUYBULL teachings. So they remain willfully ignorant, and fully worhty of our scorn.
I was thinking the same thing athy...however it COULD be the same...and is likely close to the same 100 for white people ...higher for Asians and lower for other races... just sayin!
Shouldn't there be just one *that* in the statement?
I suppose so. What of it? CNN is too cheap to hire proofreaders and editors. So is the WaPo. No news there.
Prayer changes things
I'm sorry, "Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things", but your assertions regarding atheism and prayer are unfounded. Using my Idiomatic Expression Equivalency module (IEE), the expression that best matches the degree to which your assertions may represent truths is: "TOTAL FAIL".
I see that you repeat these unfounded statements with high frequency. Perhaps the following book can help you:
I'm Told I Have Dementia: What You Can Do... Who You Can Turn to...
"Ronald Regonzo" who degenerates to:
"Salvatore" degenerates to:
"Douglas" degenerates to:
"truth be told" degenerates to:
"Thinker23" degenerates to:
"Atheism is not healthy ..." degenerates to:
"another repentant sinner" degenerates to:
"Dodney Rangerfield" degenerates to:
"tina" degenerates to:
"captain america" degenerates to:
"Atheist Hunter" degenerates to:
"Anybody know how to read? " degenerates to:
"just sayin" degenerates to:
"ImLook'nUp" degenerates to:
"Kindness" degenerates to:
"Chad" degenerates to
"Bob" degenerates to
"nope" degenerates to:
"2357" degenerates to:
"WOW" degenerates to:
"fred" degenerates to:
"!" degenerates to:
"John 3:16" degenerates to:
"pervert alert" is the degenerate.
This troll is not a christian
Prayer does not; you are such a LIAR. You have NO proof it changes anything! A great example of prayer proven not to work is the Christians in jail because prayer didn't work and their children died. For example: Susan Grady, who relied on prayer to heal her son. Nine-year-old Aaron Grady died and Susan Grady was arrested.
An article in the Journal of Pediatrics examined the deaths of 172 children from families who relied upon faith healing from 1975 to 1995. They concluded that four out of five ill children, who died under the care of faith healers or being left to prayer only, would most likely have survived if they had received medical care.
The statistical studies from the nineteenth century and the three CCU studies on prayer are quite consistent with the fact that humanity is wasting a huge amount of time on a procedure that simply doesn’t work. Nonetheless, faith in prayer is so pervasive and deeply rooted, you can be sure believers will continue to devise future studies in a desperate effort to confirm their beliefs.
Jason’s Cajun Jambalaya
Shrimp, Chicken and Andouille sausage, packed with vegetables and zesty Creole Seasoning! It’s more full of shit that Jason! $7.99
Now *that* cracked me up!
Me too. Can you create a KRHODES special, please?
The menu gets better every day. But aren't you afraid of fundie picketers?
You gotta love it. Of the top three most popular beliefs about the age of the earth, get this................drum roll please........none of them is right.
Google the Gap Theory to get a better idea.
So you are sure you know the exact age of Earth, are you? Based on what? What credentials do you have? Why should anyone care what you think?
The gap theory does not solve 99.99% of the problems raised by 7-day creationism. Leave it to christians to attempt to fix a problem with an even more confusing and wrong idea than the one that they are attempting to fix.
Creationist: 17 + porcupine = swingset!!
Rational person: Um... No.
Creationist: Yeah, but you just say that because you haven't considered that between 17 and porcupine there were dancing lollipops in black hole cream sauce.
Rational person: What does that even??!?!?.... I don't...??!?
Gap Theory is freaking hilarious. I haven't seen something that stupid in a long time.
Moby, your 6:31 had me rotf...
23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.
24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.
25 I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.
26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger.
27 For thus hath the Lord said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.
28 For this shall the earth mourn, and the heavens above be black; because I have spoken it, I have purposed it, and will not repent, neither will I turn back from it.
And the earth was without form, and void;
and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
The word for "was" – hayah – is the same word used in Genesis 19:26 where Lot's wife was (hayah) turned into a pillar of salt. The implication is that the word hayah is not simply descriptive, but is active. Furthermore, the word "vav" for "and" can also be read as "but" depending on the context. In the Septuagint it has actually been translated this way. Thus Genesis 1:2 could, or should, read;
"But the earth became (or "had become") without form, and void".
“Without form, and void" has been translated from the Hebrew phrase "tohu vav bohu". The words tohu and bohu are also found in Isaiah 34:11, but is there interpreted differently;
Isaiah 34:11 "But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion (tohu) and the stones of emptiness (bohu)."
Thus “tohu” can also mean "confused", and “bohu” can mean “empty”. "Confused" and "without form" share in common a lack of order, in a place where there should be order. Perhaps, then, the text could be read as follows; "But the earth was in disarray, and empty".
Judging by your post, you're still blind, but only because you're refusing to open your eyes. Especially when it comes to the fact that your bible has absolutely no relevance to people who do not believe in that book of fiction.
Jeremiah was a bullfrog.
" For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men…But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up…looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?" 2 Peter 3:5-7, 10, 12
Mairseadotes and doeseedotes and liddlelamseedivey....
Just as meaningful and far more entertaining.
@Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son; "Mairseadotes and doeseedotes and liddlelamseedivey....Just as meaningful and far more entertaining."
The devil has you right where he wants you. So sad.
That's just perfect. Nutter tries to use "sciencey" sounding creationist bs to explain something. Nutter is refuted. Nutter resorts to fingers in the ears and bible passages.
I never understood a single word he said, But I helped him drink his wine.
I follow you perfectly – the age of the earth is clearly 17. We just don't know how long 1 is.
For a better understanding of 'Creation' and the times before the writings of the Word of God, we invite you to read the article 'Creation' listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca
All of the other pages and articles listed on our website explain how and by whom this whole world has been deceived as confirmed in Revelation 12:9.
Absurdity of Canadian Creationism, pagan Bob & Dougism, more beerism. NO DOGS!
Bob and Dougism??? LMFAO!
Loved that show, eh, hoser?
They speak of their hindu soul, filthy desire and claim it be from truth absolute GOD, way of hindu sanatan pagan pastors to hind fool humanity to load their pockets with wealth. Way of hindu Magi's, criminal tricksters to use and abuse name of truth absolute GOD, foundation of America for ages.
Rubio is a twink. His faith notwithstanding, he is much too inexperienced to even BEGIN to contemplate a run for the WH in 2016.
Not to mention that he seems to jump around the religious board a bit! RC, LDS, attending a Baptist Church, but considers himself a "practicing Catholic"...garnering the religious vote one church at a time...Catholicism doesn't seem to me what he's practicing...
But we should have said the same about Obama (well-spoken, inexperienced). No need to think about this right now, though.
Actually I DID say the same thing about the POTUS when he began his run in 2008; and...?
At least he's married to a former Miami Dolphins cheerleader.
He's got that going for him.
When will he announce his conversion to Taoism?
Let the educating of Mr. Rubio begin with the help of 1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis:
origin: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482 NY Times review and important enough to reiterate.
New Torah For Modern Minds
“Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. (prob•a•bly
Adverb: Almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell).
The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.
Such startling propositions - the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years - have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity - until now.
The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine doc-ument.
The notion that the Bible is not literally true "is more or less settled and understood among most Conservative rabbis," observed David Wolpe, a rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a contributor to "Etz Hayim." But some congregants, he said, "may not like the stark airing of it." Last Passover, in a sermon to 2,200 congregants at his synagogue, Rabbi Wolpe frankly said that "virtually every modern archaeologist" agrees "that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way that it happened, if it happened at all." The rabbi offered what he called a "LITANY OF DISILLUSION”' about the narrative, including contradictions, improbabilities, chronological lapses and the absence of corroborating evidence. In fact, he said, archaeologists digging in the Sinai have "found no trace of the tribes of Israel - not one shard of pottery."
Then Mr. Rubio might be part Ne-anderthal making his education a bit more difficult. Maybe all political leaders should have their DNA checked for this. Tis rather inexpensive:
As per National Geographic's Genographic project:
" DNA studies suggest that all humans today descend from a group of African ancestors who about 60,000 years ago began a remarkable journey. Follow the journey from them to you as written in your genes”.
"Adam" is the common male ancestor of every living man. He lived in Africa some 60,000+ years ago, with the first modern h-omo sapiens appearing in Africa some 200,000 years ago, which means that all humans lived in Africa at least at that time.
Unlike his Biblical namesake, this Adam was not the only man alive in his era. Rather, he is unique because his descendents are the only ones to survive.
It is important to note that Adam does not literally represent the first human. He is the coalescence point of all the genetic diversity."
For your $199 and a DNA swab:
"Included in the markers we will test for is a subset that scientists have recently determined to be from our h-ominin cousins, Ne-anderthals and the newly discovered Denisovans, who split from our lineage around 500,000 years ago. As modern humans were first migrating out of Africa more than 60,000 years ago, Neanderthals and Denisovans were still alive and well in Eurasia. It seems that our ancestors met, leaving a small genetic trace of these ancient relatives in our DNA. With Geno 2.0, you will learn if you have any Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA in your genome."
Mr. Rubio would be wise to check the human evolution time line featured at before his next news conference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution#First_living_beings
Thanks for the offer and insight, Reality, but I think I'll save my $199.
I came from my parents.
What does this have to do with Rubio's comments, though? One can readily accept all that and not settle on the currently orthodox scientific explanation... which as an evidence-based conclusion is necessarily poor because it's not fully testable. I am confident that the 4.5B age is the best we can get with what we can observe, but it's nearly all breakdown products of radioactives. The accuracy of the age is dependent on the initial assumptions (and the universe is -much- worse).
It is hardly news that the OT was oral tradition that got heavily distorted. This can only be taken so far, though. Individual figures like David can easily be questioned. But we can't conclude from the lack of archaeological record that an event like the Exodus didn't happen or that an Egypt-fleeing band later known as the Israelites didn't overrun Jericho, because there is no necessary reason why it would leave a findable record. A caravan could zip across the Sinai in a few days and at many different points in history could have taken Jericho without a fight.
Please send your comments to Rabbi Wolpe et al since they are the ones who did all the background studies and made their conclusions from said studies for the "New Torah for Modern Minds".
Rubio needs mental help
Anyone would need mental help going from Catholic to Mormon to Catholic to Baptist! We don't know his personal life, though-could be the wife who is Baptist.
"Christianity is a form of mental illness- FACT"
And you have proof that is the case given you are making a claim?
I would have added the obvious comment about the pot and the kettle, but I demurred.
Are we familiar with any mental illnesses that are transmittable? I believe that schizophrenia is virus-related: but -related, not a symptom. I am rather more inclined to trust people of 2000 years ago who put their necks on the line for a belief conceived in their near term than people questioning it in the modern day because it doesn't make any sense... especially when I don't actually gain anything by choosing option B. Lots of things don't make sense.
A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary. Unlike hallucinations, delusions are always pathological (the result of an illness or illness process). As a pathology, it is distinct from a belief based on false or incomplete information, confabulation, dogma, illusion, or other effects of perception.
People who believe in santa, faires, sky wizards etc...fall under this. Of course depending on the severity of their mental illness, they might even to go as far as to actuall think they "feel" the mythical creature present and have hallucinations
Are we familiar with any mental illnesses that are transmittable? I believe that schizophrenia is virus-related: but -related, not a symptom. I am rather more inclined to trust people of 2000 years ago who put their necks on the line for a belief conceived in their near term than people questioning it in the modern day because it doesn't make any sense... especially when I don't actually gain anything by choosing option B. Lots of things don't make sense.
Option A ,,,so which myhthical creature do you play yoru faith safe with? There are many sub catagories under option A...man has been making them up for quite sometime.
Perhaps you believe in the Native American version?? Perhaps the Mayan? Perhaps the ones from the Middle East????
Nordic????? Surely because their stories are old you trust them? Perhaps you still believe in dragons and don't trust people today saying they dont exist....people used to write about them 1000's of years ago.
Perhaps JFCanton is ligthing candles slamming himself to the ground and waiving his arms wildly in the air this morning?
ME ME ME ME ME ...over here God....me me me me./..favor me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Christianity is the only form of mental sanity because it has the absolutes, the rest is relevant and false.
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.