 |
|
|
|
November 19th, 2012
04:19 PM ET
Rubio ignites debate with answer about creationismBy 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. |
  About this blog
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 and Eric Marrapodi with daily contributions from CNN's worldwide newsgathering team and frequent posts from religion scholar and author Stephen Prothero.  |
|
|
|
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertise with us | About us | Help | Advertising Practices
Evolution is a myth
Swing and a myth....
But your book about zombies walking the earth is completely true...... right Pedro?
@ End Religion..I think you gave the silly ones too much to chew on..they have not said anything in a while.
Thank you, kind sir. It's been a while since anyone told me I had too much to chew on.
haha
ER, you could wipe the oatmeal off your chin. "Sides, it's not polite to eat in front of others without offerin'. No upbringin'? Even Monica knew that.
I already wiped my chin off on your thigh while we were 69ing. Thanks for offering to "catch" while I "pitch" afterward.
Poor Hillary. Having to hear, "I did not have oatmeal with that woman!" over and over.
The wit is appreciated and admired! thanks.
Luke, sorry I didn't have an entire day to chat with you guys. ER didn't say anything we haven't all heard before. So I am still waiting to answer to my question.
Oh, look, Don's lying again.
Piper, what am I lying about? You post a lot of things that just don't make any sense.
Don and ? must be putting that plasma cutter in the trunk....
how heavy do you think that is? I would imagine a plasma cutter to fight atheists would be pretty heavy.. oh and Piper's son..maybe they are using their engineering skills in "thermal dynamics" to sew up some warm coats for their cold trek to Nebraska.
You mean they're shoving their plasma cutters into each other's fudge cutters?
The all-new THERMAL DYNAMICS® TRUE™ Series CUTMASTER® 42 is one of the most affordable, highest quality 1/4" (6 mm) plasma systems on the market. As part of the TRUE Series, you can rely on the CUTMASTER 42 to cut all day at its recommended cutting capacity and to pack more punch when you need it
Hey "man", I Marco Rubio, can't answer questions like that. If you say what is '2+2', I have to answer that it is one of the great mysteries of life, because Grover Norquist has to tell me what answer he wants me to parrot back today.
Nearly all the atheists posting here who hold science up like it is a religion know very little about science. I'm willing to bet that I have studied more science than they have. The difference is that I don't place my faith in science. Science is their religion and logic is their god.
I'll bet you haven't. But since you'll lie about it, who cares?
Well, yeah! But I can tell you how fast you are gonna fall off that 10 story building and how long before you go splat on the ground. I can PROVE that, still waiting for your proof.
@ Evangelical.. I am a student studying geospatial information sciences, remote sensing and biology. I am in the Fisheries and Wildlife Department at the School of Natural Resources at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, I was also a US Marine. You are very ignorant and rude. Let us debate..I will win over any scientific topic you chose.
and by the way, logic is not "our" god..it is what disproves yours.
*going to get popcorn*
*clapping hands* Can I watch too.
popcorn? More like carnal corn.
Wait, wait! Make that 2 boxes of carnal p o r n. Sorry for being impulsive. That can lead to procreation.
Evangelical had to choose between science books and a zombie book......and then implies those that don't accept the zombie book are being dumb.
@Cheese
The Bible is full of FACTS. The science books are full of THEORIES. Learn the difference.
Evangelical,
What FACT is in the bible that proves your god is real?
.......the ONLY thing that is "A MYSTERY"........is the GOP's belief in spirts and demons over ROCK SOLID SCIENCE.....GOD gave us BRAINS to use..............I guess the GOP is conserving theirs...............
......and you BIBLE thumpers out there...........I BELIEVE IN GOD THE FATHER, CHRIST HIS SON, AND THE HOLY SPIRT............and I also know that GOD gave us reason and thought to USE.............and HIS love will finally conquer evil and stupidity............
The GOP play to their base, do you really think so many of them can mouth the same nonsense over and over and really believe it. I wonder. If they do, would you really want them making decisions for you and if they don't and lie about it would you really want them making decisions for you? They play to the least educated, but I assume the rest of us(Fiscal Republicans) will just fall in line. I voted for Obama and will continue to vote Independent or Democratic until they expunge the social conservative or at least shut them up.
Dammit, trex! I . . . . . warned you be . . . .fore about . . . . using my . . . . speech cadence in your . . . . . .. . . . posts. It's copyrighted . . . .. . You'll be . . . . hearing from my . . . . . lawyers!
Which bible verse points to plasma cutters?
The one that mentions Thermal Dynamics! Ask ?.
If they were smart they might try to say god is the plasma cutter....
They've already redefined plasma to mean "that which has been molded."
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/plasma.html
So it isn't a foggy-brained religious person's leap in weak logic to say god molded men, therefore he is a plasma cutter.
Newsflash: You're not god, He is... Atheism/humanism is a religion bub...
@IncorrectlyRight: Perhaps you should pray to me, your new god. While my intellect may not be dizzying, yours is of such deficiency that mine must seem staggering and magical to you. I am performing what appears to be miracles on this blog daily. May I point out that I also only demand a tithe of 9.5% and am therefore a more economical choice? I also provide each of my sheep his/her own planet upon death, and 50 virgins upon a martyr's death.
Apparently, Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son's "perversion" is his critical thinking skills and an innate ability to debate using logic and science to back up what he says.
I don't think that is "perversion"; methinks ? needs to look up what the word means before tossing it blindly about as an insult ? doesn't even understand the meaning of.
Just my two cents, reading a thread that has highly entertained me.
? is some cowardly little liar who is ashamed of having been outed as a dumbazz in previous threads. This run of comments is typical.
? and others seem to believe TTPS is a gay male although Tom has stated many times she is female. She may have to say it a few more times though because the tiny brain inside just about any religious person's head is so crammed with bible verses there is not much room left for actual facts or powers of reason and logic. Their brain cycles are simply all used up trying to constantly puzzle out how the absurd fiction of the bible can be aligned with the scientific reality. It's a wonder their brain has cycles remaining even for involuntary functions like breathing.
Sorry, Tom, Tom, I didn't know you were female; I'm new to this blog.
Mea culpa for assuming.
Thanks, End Religion, for the information, although I don't think that if TT WERE a gay male, it would be termed a "perversion", any more than anyone's gender preference should be.
The use of "perversion" isn't mine. It is what I believe is meant by others, who have accused Tom of perversion previously, and since they are religious many of them do feel it's a perversion. I personally couldn't care less which consenting adult one pokes or with which kitchen utensil.
No worries, Akira. ? is a troll who appears here under dozens of names but is instantly recognizable as a blockhead without peer.
Just for the record, though, I am female and straight. I picked my screen name because for some odd reason the nursery rhyme from which it comes just popped into my mind one day while I was posting here.
Apparently, this mystifies the fundies.
Just like Athena popped out. The Greeksters sure have a problem with the birds and the bees.
Thank the flying spaghetti monster we have some atheist women out here! They may be our last hope setting religious men straight on good fantasies versus bad fantasies.
I think Akira is female too, if I remember correctly.
So, "“I'm not a scientist, man,” Rubio told the interviewer. , and 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.”, hmmm. So apparently Rubio thinks you have to be a scientist to understand how the world works? Well Rubio, I'm not a scientist but I understand that if I step off a tall building gravity is not going to be my friend. Do rub what brain cells you have and get them working. I've always said the major side effect of religion is that it seems to shut down brain functions connected to critical thinking.
And further, if Rubio truly believes this do you really want someone who doesn't understand how the world works making decisions for you, if he doesn't believe the whole creation nonsense and is just mouthing off to "his" base do you really want a disingenuous person making decisions for you?
You would do well to put your faith in God and not in science.
Sorry I don't put faith in things that are made up fantasies.
Two word Evangelical, PROVE IT, then we'll talk.
Evangullible, the champion of gullibility.
God is no fantasy. I agree with what previous posters posted below. You just don't want to be held accountable for your sins. Thus you say that God is made-up, as if saying it makes it true.
So if you believe in god, you don't do bad things, really, REALLY? HHMMMM.
Actually I'm a huge believer in accountability. I don't do bad things not because some scary demon is gonna torture me for all eternity but because it's the right thing to do.
Even believers do bad things, but they know that they will be held accountable come judgment.
All your statement says, Eva, is that you have no moral center of your own and require the threat of eternal damnation to behave well toward others.
And for you and others like you, THAT isn't even sufficient. You behave like azzholes anyway.
What Tom said!!!!!!!!
I think there is going to have to be a war between Christians and atheists. There is no way we can tolerate this ungodliness. Christians are going to turn on the atheists because you can't reason with an atheist.
As soon as you typed the first two words, you were wrong.
Oooh. Are you going to use a plasma cutter on atheists? I hear Thermal Dynamics makes a great model! Just ask ?.
Also, atheists don't know their place as a minority.
Work on adding the "I", it might help.
@Evangelical, you do know the Earth goes around the sun right.
Piper's son:
Lets use our CPS3000 (christian plasma cutter 3000) for this war:
By the way Q, if you feel the need to start yet another war you're going to make us all fall off of the fiscal cliff for sure!
"you can't reason with an atheist"
oh sweet, sweet irony!
Cliff? Q just finished falling off the turnip truck!
"I think there is going to have to be a war between Christians and atheists. There is no way we can tolerate this ungodliness. "
If there's one thing you zealots of "peace and love" know it's that any reason is a good reason to war against groups who hold differing values.
I think Eva is Apple Bush just entertaining himself....
@ Evangelical: atheists also come in the form of scientists .. without scientists there would have been no bombs, rockets, tanks, helicopters clothes or guns to fight wars.
"Atheists don't know their place as a minority" made me crack up hysterically...
Everyone is an atheist, I wonder if Evangelical believes in Kali?
to the people here claiming the earth is 6000 years old. Would you be a Christian if you were born in Asia?
I'm a Christian and I don't claim the earth to be 6,000 years old. I do know that scriptures describes 3 earth ages and 3 heaven ages. You can read about those 3 earth and heaven ages in the bible too, if you knew how to read scriptures.
If you were born to Christian-American citicens who were living in Asia for work, then yes you would be christian. By the way Asia is a continent. Asia is a very large area encompasing many religions, even christianaity. Do you want me to continue to exploit your stupidity on a national blog?
"Asia" is home to Israel. Christianity, I believe, stemmed from there. Again, Chuck..want me to continue?
Citizens* lol
encompassing* lol..sorry, CHUCK, you got me so fired up I tried to out type my spelling processor in my BRAIN that I have.
Chuck,
I did not have very good spelling on this post..I just realized I even spelled christianity wrong...you really got me fired up, that has never happened before. I do appologize and welcome any more comments you have.
chuck
to the people here claiming they are 6000 years old. Would you be an earthling if you were born on the moon? chuckie-cheesie!
@ lol...lol, nice
The same old mindless godless drivel. "The earth is billions of years old...." oy This is a clear rejection of God and His Word. And obvious promotion of the teachings of men, most of whom are godless, and rebellious, and have no regard for their Creator. For the majority of us who do believe in God. It is clear that: "For in six days God created the heavens, the earth, the sea, and all that is in them." ....Exodus 20 PTL Baruch Atah Adonai Eloheynu Melech Ha olam.
The bible is stupid and it's god is a colossal azzhole. If there is a god, he wouldn't be so stupid as to use the bible to share his will. People who believe ancient myths are true are ignorant. Don't be ignorant.
God never told us how old the world is. He did say the first age was destroyed.
First Earth Age destroyed with water. "Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished" [2nd Peter 3:6].
God never said anything, dearie. He never wrote a word. Men did.
Joel; the sooner you accept the truth the sooner you will see the real light.
Until recently, astronomers estimated that the Big Bang occurred between 12 and 14 billion years ago. To put this in perspective, the Solar System is thought to be 4.5 billion years old and humans have existed as a genus for only a few million years. Astronomers estimate the age of the universe in two ways: 1) by looking for the oldest stars; and 2) by measuring the rate of expansion of the universe and extrapolating back to the Big Bang; just as crime detectives can trace the origin of a bullet from the holes in a wall.
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_age.html
Wrong again Tom. All scriptures are inspired by God. He may not have actually penned his truth, but, he inspired holy men to do so. Chalk it up to he was busy saving all our souls.
Nope, dope. You've presented not one shred of credible evidence for that.
Now when are you going to reveal my "perversion," you dishonest creep?
How do you know all scriptures are inspired by god? Were you there? Because the scriptures themselves say so? The stupidity of you religious dingbats is truly appalling.
The bible: an instruction manual for simpletons and those who want to control them.
Joel, what atheists don't know because they never seriously looked into what Jesus wrote .... is that Jesus calls the destruction of the first earth age the katabole or takabollo.
2 Corinthians 4:9
9 Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down [kataballo], but not destroyed (KJV)
Hebrews 6:1
1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying [kataballo] again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God (KJV)
Read 2nd Peter 3:4-7, and , Jeremiah 4:23-27
Also, atheists never learned how to read Below, the first earth age is in blue and the second earth age in red:, divided by || for the color blind:
Genesis 1:1-2
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. || And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (KJV)
End Religion, yes, Jesus ensured that even a 5 year old can learn his truth. Now, what excuse do atheists use?
Temper, temper Athy. Your slip is showing.
Saving our souls from what? Him?
pjharren, if you're not pleasing to your fellow man, that's a good indication you are not pleasing to Jesus.
What man finds you pleasing? I can't even imagine.
Where's that description you were asked to provide? You know, the one about my "perversion?"
One can certainly refute the likelihood of the God of Abraham regardless of the validity of current evolutionary theory. There is certainly much unknown about the origins of matter. But the lack of credibility for virtually all Abrahamic religious belief is quite obvious to some in the same way that spam is obvious. The OT is rehashed ancient folklore at best. And what better way to draw more non-believers to your new religion than to base your new religion on one that already exists – the god of Abraham of ancient mythology. Add some new twists and Christianity is born. Do it again in America with some even more dazzling twists and walla – Mormonism is born. It should be enough to question ancient folklore, but the twists injected for adding a new flavor is especially a red flag. There is no credible proof to any of the magic (miracles, interface with a higher being) in these religions. Written eyewitness testimony from or about a group that may have the same political motive (such as Jesus' inner circle, Paul & his secretary, Joseph Smith & Co. & Families, Inc., etc.) is not credible evidence.
Hey, mama k! How was your Thanksgiving? Did the "thermal dynamics" of your turkey roaster result in a moist, tender, and delicious bird? I hope your gravy was smooth and your pumpkin pies heavenly.
Lol. yes it most certainly did, Tom. Hope you had a good one too.
?: it's no surprise you find a book filled with hate, murder and r@pe is appropriate for a 5 year old. And you may want to look up 'simpleton.' The definition is not "a 5 year old." But then again, you are coming through on everything I would expect of a simpleton.
This is a huge issue that must be attend to promptly with leadership from the scientific community. Americans should be rallying to find a way to put the eco – back in economics.
~To the likes of Rubio: Get your minds off planet Earth, look at the "blue marble" and think about the physics, chemistry and uncomprehendable amount of energy needed for the creation of the universe we live in and also the universes we have not discovered yet and then compare your energy to that. My point is, the human species is as insignificant as it is amazing and inspiring. Put humans first and not religion or politics. Our species is what makes us unique, not our nations.
Yes, God also gave us thermal dynamics. God is great and Christians admit it.
I believe you mean "thermodynamics," ?. Not "thermal dynamics."
"Thermal Dynamics is the leading producer of manual and automated plasma cutting systems. Find out how to purchase a plasma cutter today."
See, ?,?
to the mystery person "?" .. thermal dynamics? is that the reason why I could not make up my mind on what LL Bean jacket I wanted for christmas this year? Becuase all of the thermals are so dynamically different?
@?, Maybe you should ask Santa for a plasma cutter manufactured by Thermal Dynamics.
"Those who believe in the lie of evolution are stubbornly resistent toward God because they would have to be accountable to Him if they acknowledged Him, so the easy way for them is to say that there is no god. They prefer to live a self-centered, humanistic and ego driven life.'
What utter and complete bullish!t. Provide evidence that those who accept evolution as being the most likely explanation for the development of species are "self-centered, humanistic, and ego driven." I'll be eagerly awaiting your proof. The vast majority of people who are educated beyond the level of high school know that evolution is far more reasonable and has more evidence to support it than do creationism or intelligent design.
You believe your trash mouth as your best feature, do you really believe that you are the fittest to have survived? GMAB.
Piper's Son, All kidding aside I have to give you credit for your post.
Using words like "most likely" and "more reasonable" demonstrate that you view these theories as theories and not as established facts. By the way, I do not believe these theories, it would take too much blind faith.
@?
It's the fittest genes that survive, not the fittest individuals. You can't look at any one individual, or even at any one individual species to get any idea of how evolution works. You certainly can't look at one characteristic of one individual for any ideas about evolution. Our life spans subject us to a timescale that is really poor for any sort of "common sense" understanding of biological evolution. Try reading "The Selfish Gene" –I think by Dawkins, but I'm not sure.
?/herbie, keep on whining.
To Don: it takes an education and a thinking brain to accept a scientific theory like gravity or evolution. You should try to get those.
Actually, Don the only people I've ever heard say that evolution requires "blind faith" to accept, are those who employ "blind faith" on a daily basis in order to accept religious dogma.
I'll stick with the model that is supported by evidence, and will continue to reject the model that provides not one shred of evidence, until such evidence appears.
How was the discovery of gravity first considered? Hebrews 1:3 gave the idea.
Do tell. I'm sure you're the perfect person to explain the bible, considering you can't write a sentence without screwing up.
Do tell. I'm sure you're the perfect person to explain the bible, considering you can't write a sentence messing up.
Piper's Son, Now I am really confused? I thought it was the Law of Gravity and the Theory of Evolution? Has Gravity been downgraded to a theory now?
You write a lot for saying so little.
Still waiting for you to expose my "perversion," ?. When are you going to get around to that? You lie a lot for one who can barely manage a sentence. Do try to use commas correctly on occasion, won't you, ?, ?
Don, look it up. It can be both. If you don't know the definition for either word as it is used in science, you might want to start there.
As for your challenge below, again, why should anyone bother?
GMAB = Give Me A Brain
Here's a good example of your perversion Tom. Accepting credit for the following, when you and Reality just started using the terminology. Not so a few years ago ... See below.
Don
Don
Piper's Son, All kidding aside I have to give you credit for your post.
Using words like "most likely" and "more reasonable" demonstrate that you view these theories as theories and not as established facts. By the way, I do not believe these theories, it would take too much blind faith.
Don, I do believe that most who have a problem with your comment are thinking, "well..god has never shown himself" is that not blind faith to believe in god as well? please explain yourself with LOGIC.
That's what you think is a "perversion?" You really are stupid, aren't you? I thought at first you were just faking it, but I see now that you're truly brainless.
Go find a post in which I said what you claim; provide the citation.
As ? can't figure out the meanings of the phrase "survival of the fittest" or the words "theory" or "law," I guess I shouldn't be surprised that it doesn't have a clue what "perversion" means, either.
I must have really bruised your little ego at some point,?. I suppose that is why you're posting under yet another screen name. You're too embarrassed to use the original, aren't you?
http://science.kennesaw.edu/~rmatson/3380theory.html
As for my challenge below... I should have expected "why should anyone bother" would be the best response I would get.
What part of "why bother" do you fail to grasp?
You have already indicated that you won't believe anything presented as evidence.
The shsctick's New,new covenant, err religion: "It's the fittest genes that survive, not the fittest individuals. You can't look at any one individual, or even at any one individual species to get any idea of how evolution works. You certainly can't look at one characteristic of one individual for any ideas about evolution. Our life spans subject us to a timescale that is really poor for any sort of "common sense" understanding of biological evolution." Why not just say you are short sighted and enjoy the party?
Piper, I must have missed the post explaining why we should believe the Earth is 4.5 Billion years old. Could you repost that evidence?
Just because Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son's mom was a pervert doesn't mean he HAD to follow that path. It was just easier and more fun. Ye olde pleasure in unrighteous thing, again. It's a common trait with all h0m0 saps. The community type like to revel in it. The game is a race to the bottom.
Better question, what is smart about what Chuck said?
What was smart? That he called a spade a spade. You on the other hand defended an idiot's post.
When is the GOP going to stop being the party of s tupid?
The only blend of creationism and science that makes sence, is that the universe is god's game of Spore.
There is no blend of rational thought that includes creationism.
Millions of ignorant people believe this nonsense. In Rubio's own state, there's a theme park where you can see Jesus riding a dinosaur, because Christians think their Holy Book declares the world to be 6,000 years old. They think their God faked all those fossils to test their faith. People this dumb imagine that they're important enough to be the purpose of all creation. How likely is that?
It's obvious you don't know how to read the bible, if you claim you have. Reading the bible takes a life time obligation, none of which atheists are up to meet that standard, since you are a trash and burn mentality. 2 Peter 3 explains the 3 earth and heaven ages, I suggest you read it before you keep spewing atheists lies about God's truth.
I suggest you learn to write a sentence before you make yourself look even more simple-minded than you already have, ?.
@ ?
You are overgeneralizing. I know many atheists who are atheists precisely because they started reading and studying the bible critically, rather than just taking it as truth without consideration. I personally spent several decades in ministry and have read the bible about 6 times and have studied parts of it for years or more. Eventually, through a very long and hard process, I left behind my faith in it as "God's word" to man.
Tom, look in the mirror. That's if your perversion allows sight.
Oh, sweetie, you must have been smacked around in another thread and still bear a grudge. Why don't you tell everyone what my "perversion" is, dear?
?, we're begging you, please learn to construct a coherent sentence. Maybe the issue is that the bible itself is gibberish, and since that's apparently the only book you've ever read it is your model for expressing yourself?
Let the Republican Party keep making fools of themselves over issues like this. They will never win another national election. God works in mysterious ways. And he is using this discussion over himself to bring down the very party who claims him. Embrace the irony.
The people who reject the God that created the heavens and the earth in a literal six days, prefer to believe and spread the lies of evolution. Evolution is the theory that some inorganic mass of soup formed some 3.5 to 4.5 billion years ago, containing ammonia, nitrogen and CO2 just formed somehow out of nowhere to produce everything we see today, really?
The hebrew term for a literal day, 24 hour period is "yom". Those who believe in the lie of evolution are stubbornly resistent toward God because they would have to be accountable to Him if they acknowledged Him, so the easy way for them is to say that there is no god. They prefer to live a self-centered, humanistic and ego driven life.
Science tells us that "biogenesis" means that only life can produce life. Rocks, planets, asteroids and space elements cannot produce life. Tadpoles and monkeys cannot produce human life. We have our DNA from our parents...
Surely you can use fewer words to prove how stupid you are.
What is your proof that any of the claims of your religion are true? (hint: the bible is not proof)
Chuck, you managed to do it with 12.
What is "stupid" about Chuck's post? He's right. The op's drivel is dreck.
Cheesemaker, you seem to have a pretty good handle on all this, explain how we get to that 4.5 Billion number again?
Well Don alot of it has to do with geology (the study of rocks). You see, we can date rocks using a variety of methods and when those methods give the same answers we can say that they 'prove' the answer. We know the moon shares rocks from the earth and so we can date how long ago the moon ran into the earth.
Or we can use your method of relying on a book written by bronze age goat herders that claims "magic did it", that is no more reliable that any other book of supersi.tious mythology.
The Hebrew word yom or yohm refers in the Old Testament can refer to a literal day, several seasons (Zechariah 14:8), a thousand years (Psalm 90:4), or any extended period of time.
Thank you for that. I guess the whole debate is over now, Cheesemaker has told us about moon rocks. I guess we have to go along with the 4.5 billion year theory. How much more evidence do we need? Time to feed the Goats.
He certainly provided more explanation than you have, Don.
Chuck, as you did?
Sorry, don't look to me to explain the 4.5 Billion Year theory. I can't. Apparently no one else here can either.
I'm sure that many can. But why should they bother to explain something to someone who believes in a fairy godfather who created all in 6 days?
I am not asking for "many", just one. Any takers?
Actually Cc assumes way too much. One can certainly refute the likelihood of the God of Abraham regardless of the validity of current evolutionary theory. There is certainly much unknown about the origins of matter. But the lack of credibility for most Abrahamic religious belief are quite obvious to some in the same way that spam is obvious. The OT is rehashed ancient folklore at best. And what better way to draw more non-believers to your new religion than to base your new religion on one that already exists – the god of Abraham of ancient mythology. Add some new twists and Christianity is born. Do it again in America with some even more dazzling twists and walla – Mormonism is born. It should be enough to question ancient folklore, but the twists injected for adding a new flavor is especially a red flag. There is no credible proof to any of the magic (miracles, interface with a higher being) in these religions. Written eyewitness testimony from or about a group that may have the same political motive (such as Jesus' inner circle, Paul & his secretary, Joseph Smith & Co. & Families, Inc., etc.) is not credible evidence.
Here are a few "inconvenient" facts that, each independently of each other, comprehensively disprove the utter garbage of creationism.
First and most obviously is the fossil record. The fossil record is much, much more than just dinosaurs. Indeed, dinosaurs only get the press because of their size, but they make up less than 1% of the entire fossil record. Life had been evolving on Earth for over 3 thousand million years before dinosaurs evolved and has gone on evolving for 65 million years after the Chicxulub meteor likely wiped them out.
The fossil record includes the Stromatolites, colonies of prokaryotic bacteria, that range in age going back to about 3 billion years, the Ediacara fossils from South Australia, widely regarded as among the earliest multi-celled organisms, the Cambrian species of the Burgess shale in Canada (circa – 450 million years ago) the giant scorpions of the Silurian Period, the giant, wingless insects of the Devonian period, the insects, amphibians, reptiles, fishes, clams, crustaceans of the Carboniferous Period, the many precursors to the dinosaurs, the 700 odd known species of dinosaurs themselves, the subsequent dominant mammals, including the saber tooth tiger, the mammoths and hairy rhinoceros of North America and Asia, the fossils of early man in Africa and the Neanderthals of Europe.
The fossil record shows a consistent and worldwide evolution of life on Earth dating back to about 3,500,000,000 years ago. There are literally millions of fossils that have been recovered, of thousands of different species and they are all located where they would be in the geological record if life evolved slowly over billions of years. None of them can be explained by a 6,000 year old Earth and Noah’s flood. Were they all on the ark? What happened to them when it docked?
A Tyrannosaurus Rex ate a lot of food – meat- which means its food would itself have to have been fed, like the food of every other carnivore on the ark for the entire 360 odd days Noah supposedly spent on the ark. T-Rex was not even the largest carnivorous dinosaur we know of. Spinosaurus, Argentinosaurus and Carcharodontosaurus were all larger and ate more even meat. Even they were not large enough to bring down the largest sauropods we know of, many species of which weighed in at close to 100 tons and were about 100 feet long. A bit of “back of the envelope” math quickly shows that “Noah’s Ark” would actually have to have been an armada of ships larger than the D-Day invasion force, manned by thousands and thousands of people – and this is without including the World’s 300,000 current species of plants, none of which could walk merrily in twos onto the ark.
Then, of course, there are the various races of human beings. There were no Sub-Saharan Africans, Chinese, Australian Aboriginals, blonde haired Scandinavians, Pygmies or Eskimos on the Ark. Where did they come from?
Second, there are those little things we call oil, natural gas and other fossil fuels. Their mere existence is another, independent and fatal blow to the creationists. Speak to any geologist who works for Exxon Mobil, Shell or any of the thousands of mining, oil or natural gas related companies that make a living finding fossil fuels. They will tell you these fossil fuels take millions of years to develop from the remains of large, often Carboniferous Period forests, in the case of coal, or tiny marine creatures in the case of oil. For the fossils to develop into oil or coal takes tens or hundreds of millions of years of “slow baking” under optimum geological conditions. That’s why they are called “fossil fuels.” Have a close look at coal, you can often see the fossilized leaves in it. The geologists know exactly what rocks to look for fossil fuels in, because they know how to date the rocks to tens or hundreds of millions of years ago. Creationists have no credible explanation for this.
Third, most of astronomy and cosmology would be wrong if the creationists were right. In short, as Einstein showed, light travels at a set speed. Space is so large that light from distant stars takes many years to reach the Earth. In some cases, this is millions or billions of years. The fact that we can see light from such far away stars means it began its journey billions of years ago. The Universe must be billions of years old. We can currently see galaxies whose light left home 13, 700,000,000 years ago. Indeed, on a clear night, one can see the collective, misty light of many stars more than 6,000 light years away with the naked eye, shining down like tiny accusatorial witnesses against the nonsense of creationism.
Fourth, we have not just carbon dating, but also all other methods used by scientists to date wood, rocks, fossils, and other artifacts. These comprehensively disprove the Bible’s claims. They include uranium-lead dating, potassium-argon dating as well as other non-radioactive methods such as pollen dating, dendrochronology and ice core dating. In order for any particular rock, fossil or other artifact to be aged, generally two or more samples are dated independently by two or more laboratories in order to ensure an accurate result. If results were random, as creationists claim, the two independent results would rarely agree. They generally do. They regularly reveal ages much older than Genesis. Indeed, the Earth is about 750,000 times older than the Bible claims, the Universe about three times the age of the Earth.
Fifth, the relatively new field of DNA mapping not only convicts criminals, it shows in undeniable, full detail how we differ from other life forms on the planet. For example, about 98.4% of human DNA is identical to that of chimpanzees, about 97% of human DNA is identical to that of gorillas, and slightly less again of human DNA is identical to the DNA of monkeys. This gradual divergence in DNA can only be rationally explained by the two species diverging from a common ancestor, and coincides perfectly with the fossil record. Indeed, scientists can use the percentage of DNA that two animal share (such as humans and bears, or domestic dogs and wolves) to get an idea of how long ago the last common ancestor of both species lived. It perfectly corroborates the fossil record and is completely independently developed.
Sixth, the entire field of historical linguistics would have to be rewritten to accommodate the Bible. This discipline studies how languages develop and diverge over time. For example, Spanish and Italian are very similar and have a recent common “ancestor” language, Latin, as most people know. However, Russian is quite different and therefore either did not share a common root, or branched off much earlier in time. No respected linguist anywhere in the World traces languages back to the Tower of Babel, the creationists’ simplistic and patently absurd explanation for different languages. Indeed, American Indians, Australian Aboriginals, “true” Indians, Chinese, Mongols, Ja.panese, Sub-Saharan Africans and the Celts and other tribes of ancient Europe were speaking thousands of different languages thousands of years before the date creationist say the Tower of Babel occurred – and even well before the date they claim for the Garden of Eden.
Seventh, lactose intolerance is also a clear vestige of human evolution. Most mammals only consume milk as infants. After infancy, they no longer produce the enzyme “lactase” that digests the lactose in milk and so become lactose intolerant. Humans are an exception and can drink milk as adults – but not all humans – some humans remain lactose intolerant. So which humans are no longer lactose intolerant? The answer is those who evolved over the past few thousand years raising cows. They evolved slightly to keep producing lactase as adults so as to allow the consumption of milk as adults. This includes most Europeans and some Africans, notably the Tutsi of Rwanda. On the other hand, most Chinese, native Americans and Aboriginal Australians, whose ancestors did not raise cattle, remain lactose intolerant.
I could go on and elaborate on a number of other disciplines or facts that creationists have to pretend into oblivion to retain their faith, including the Ice Ages, cavemen and early hominids, much of microbiology, paleontology and archeology, continental drift and plate tectonics. Even large parts of medical research would be rendered unusable but for the fact that monkeys and mice share a common ancestor with us and therefore our fundamental cell biology and basic body architecture is identical to theirs.
In short, and not surprisingly, the World’s most gifted evolutionary biologists, astronomers, cosmologists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologists, historians, modern medical researchers and linguists (and about 2,000 years of accu.mulated knowledge) are right and a handful of Iron Age Middle Eastern goat herders copying then extant mythology were wrong. Creationists aren’t just trying to swim upstream against the weight of scientific evidence; they are trying to ascend a waterfall.
the very idea that these creationist can make the claims that they know and understand God's methods proves them to be arrogant fools. The bible when interpreted literally controdicts it's self thousands of times. This doesn't make it wrong. It makes it complex. Please take into account the bible was written to guide children who can not begin to fathom God's greatness. Science may give us small glances at the greatness of creation but we will never understand it all. The same goes for the bible. True Christians are humble.
"True Christians are humble"
No, all christians are Bumbles. And Bumbles bounce!
Correctlycenter,
The people who reject the God that created the heavens and the earth in a literal six days, prefer to believe and spread the lies of evolution.
Our evolution from a singular celled organism due the inward placed orders of the submicrocosmological being subjected beforehand; is but an under the unknowable considerations regarding the whys and hows of cellular cosmologies tenured coming of age. Yes? Maybe? No? If no then why not?
Don,
I find it interesting that you require others to prove science to you, something you can actually do yourself, but you are more than willing to take the word of a book containing multiple accounts of zombies.
Don thinks...
Zombie books = real
Science books = 1 huge consiracy to discredit his god myth perpetrated by evil scientist from every country in the world.
Take a class, read a science book.....or your other option is to stay willfully ignorant.
Yawn...still waiting for one of you experts to give us some evidence to back up your 4.5 Billion Year Theory.
Try wikipedia, Don. It's got all sorts of information for you to ignore and act contemptuously over.
Just as I suspected, you don't think for yourself. You rely on wikipedia to tell you what you believe. If you can't explain it yourself than you don't really know what you believe.
Donny, I doubt you have a clue what the word "irony" means, but your post is an example.
You rely on a book of myths and fairy tales that's 2000 years old for your "facts" but find it absurd that someone else thinks Wikipedia is a valid source of info.
The irony, she burns.
@don
You asked for an explanation and received one. I'm not sure what else you want.
He wants someone to make up some nonsense on the fly, like he did.
Don,
Science has mounds and mounds of information. It is not my job proving it to you. There are science teachers and professors all over that could explain it to you if you really wanted to know.....I don't think you do. You are too invested in your mythology to really care what is true.
Cheesemaker, with all of those "mounds and mounds of information" out there you think it would be easy to explain the 4.5 Billion Year theory but no one here as even come close. Still waiting.