 |
|
|
|
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
Bill Nye was correct to say these creationist nuts should be teaching this nonsense to children. Forcing children into a RELIGION IS CHILD ABUSE. Rubio belongs in jail, not in congress.
But daddy, who made you god? You arrogant twit.
Your assertion is correct, "Nietodarwin", misinforming children is seen as criminal by most people. Unfortunately, most people do not know how to recognize misinformation. Misinformation in the form of religious belief and regarding the origins of the earth have been perpetuated for millennia. It is therefore a difficult task to break the cycle of misinformation. I hope you're up to the task, "Nietodarwin".
more bullyin'
If getting children to believe in imaginary creatures is immoral than anyone who's ever told their kid of the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, or Santa is guilty. The problem is conspiring to continue that belief into adulthood, which the Christian community is all guilty of. Maybe this explains why some atheists sound so angry? I wasn't raised at all religious, but I can imagine wising up to God as an adult would be about as traumatic as being in your twenties when you finally realized that Santa wasn't real.
Arrogance, lol? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkCdmd80shg
@Hamm, Telling a bedtime story and sparking your child's imagination is very different than telling them a fantasy and insisting that it's true and if you don't believe it you'll burn in torment for all of eternity.
No one F-cares when the earth was created. Spend the time and money on fixing the problems in the world rather than this non-sensical bs to use later to tear someone down. The very notion that 'leaves the door open to creationism' begs the question of what the writers agenda was. The guy said he doesn't know. Maybe the writers want to weigh on how scientists explain exactly how pyramids were built, or the probability density function of aliens. Bunch of hacks.
It was obvious political pandering. But someone who sits on a science committee should have a better answer for a magazine interview than “I'm not a scientist, man,".
Magical thinking that is directly contrary to the known facts is unlikely to "fix the problems of this world." It's the same motivation that gives rise to climate change denialism and a belief in supply-side economics in direct contradiction to overwhelming evidence. Rubio is without conscience. He obviously knows better but is just pandering to the ignorance and social resentment that have become the animus of the current incarnation of the GOP. Worked well with Romney...
Gwow, gwow, gwow the beast, gently down the drain,................ merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, they like to spread out their pain.
Grim Reaper wrote, "The guy said he doesn't know".
That "guy" is a US Senator. He should have the ability to open a fucking science book and read a sentence.
You wouldn't get me up in a space shuttle if the arrogance of these educated commie committee members is any indication of their judgments if the safety of getting back is in question. Who knows how they would vote? They don't care if YOUR body is spread across a couple of states.
enough said!
There is no space shuttle.
(i'm just an idiot mirror – I'm just supposed to sit here to let the idiot poster above see how stupid they are)
Even as a Catholic, I believe God allows us to evolve and in time accept scientific FACT that He did NOT create the physical universe and in turn, the planets. After many years of confusion instilled by my religion, which is done I believe on purpose, I began to accept science instead of myth as fact. Too much is proven for science to be just a hoax. Too many "men" have manipulated the "Bible" to fit their own agenda for any human being to believe in religion to the extent that God created the physical world. Yes I believe there IS a God but I firmly believe He was a man and that others created certain things about Him to "fit" into their own agenda. I believe His words were manipulated by power hungry people to enslave and control others. After 56 years I've learned that science is based on proven FACTS and religion is mere myth used as a tool used by man. Sorry but I believe God gave me free will. With that, He gave me the ability to seek out the truth based in fact not fantasy.
God became less than omnipotent so that you could have a little free will. God became less than omnibenevolent so that you could be evil when you choose. God did not give up omniscience. He likes to watch.
"2Ti 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."
debby,
Couuldn't the mythology of Jesus have been manipulated? The christian reason for his existence doesn't make sense.
Debbie@
people should be free to teach the controversy, point out evolution's failings.
Tea Idiot,
Science controveries are not disputed and settled in K-12 classrooms. There is not a "controversey" of evolution in science. If you want to disprove science you have to do the work. Intelligent design has offered none.
Saying that the earth is 6000 years old is a non-trivial error. It an error on the magnitude of saying that the continent of North America is 7 yards wide. Religiously driven ignorance is really the only excuse for it. The evidence for an earth that is around 4.5 billion years old is overwhelming. Anyone with any amount of objectivity, whether they are religious or otherwise, should be able to find this out for themselves with little effort.
it's called "pandering."
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.
Colin, it is nice to see that you can copy and paste. We already saw this post yesterday "word for word". It wasn't stirring then and it isn't now.
Colin didn't copy it. Obviously someone else, blush, is satisfied with it's value.
And scanning below here, I don't see anything of substance from you, Don. Do you have the capability to explain any of your one-liners? Or would you be more comfortable with a like button?
At the end of the day, I love all people religious or atheist. If I saw anyone of them in a life or death situation I would risk my own to save them. I just know that life is not a product of blind chance. I also know that the worlds major religions do not represent the creator accurately
/o\, which of my one-liners do you need explained to you?
Try this one out for size – it has two parts: "Askurian, Well said. Your statement makes perfect sense. Primewonk's comment that he knows more about nuclear force than God does is kind of funny." (from your response to askurian's post at 9:30 a.m.)
You really need that explained to you?
Sure Don – explain thy lame response. Don't forget the two parts now.
Should I do it in two different posts so it will be easier for you to follow?
Whatever floats your boat.
Moral of the story: Republicans haven't learned anything about distancing themselves from the far right fringe of their base.
Yep, they still cater to a vanishing, fundamentalist minority, who still allow creationism to influence their vote.
..........GOD gave us BRAINS.............to use......................Therfore, those that deny truth and science, are actually going directly AGAINST GOD'S WISHES. GOD gave us reason and "FREE WILL" to assit us in our lives. To do what GOD wants requires, THOUGHT, LOVE, and asking for HIS assitance through prayer. GOD wants us to THINK, and decide for ourselves what is our lives course. Only the foolish do not seek HIS help and guidance. These are the ones we need to pray for the most.
Maybe your brain came from god. Mine evolved.
Here's another truth about evolution: the god of the Mormons is a twist on the god of mainstream Christians, who is a twist on the god of Israel who was based on other gods of ancient folklore and created by ancient man in man's image. I have to wonder if any of these fundamentalists are capable of recognizing spam if it's not automatically placed in a separate folder in their email app.
..........GOD gave us BRAINS.............to use......................Therfore, those that deny truth and science, are actually going directly AGAINST GOD'S WISHES. GOD gave us reason and "FREE WILL" to assit us in our lives. To do what GOD wants requires, THOUGHT, LOVE, and asking for HIS assitance through prayer. GOD wants us to THINK, and decide for ourselves what is our lives course. Only the foolish do not seek HIS help and guidance.
The guy can't even take a stand on science based facts. When are people going to learn to stop electing these morons?
Well, Hera in GA we reflected Paul Broun, who will continue to head the science and technology committee in congress.
The scariest portion of this article is that, in this day and age, 46% of Americans still believe the Earth is 10,000 y.o., was created in 6 days, and man was created in the image of an unprovable character.
I love how everyone ignores that the bible states that moon and the sun were not created until the "fourth day." So, essentially, the bible is telliing you that the 7 days of creation are not "regular earth days" right from the outset.
There is no debate or contradiction what so ever. And, the thing that is most interesting – is the bible does hae the "order of things" correct. We know it is at least 2000 years old – and it got the order of evolution correct. Do people ever spend time thinking about that? That is a very interesting thing.
Really? And what is at least 2,000 years old?
"the thing that is most interesting – is the bible does hae the "order of things" correct."
Point 1 – The earth was not created "in the beginning". The universe expanded for 9,000,000,000 years before the earth formed.
Point 2 – There was no "light" in the beginning. The early universe was way too hot and way too dense for visible light to exist. The universe had to expand and cool for 300,000 years before there was visible light.
Point 3 – There was division of waters, especially since you cannot have liquid water on the surface of the earth without a sun to provide heat. And the sun didn't show up until day 4.
Point 4 – There was no vegetation on earth before there was a photon source to drove photosynthesis and a heat source. Remember, your god didn't create the sun until day 4.
Point 5 – The moon is not a light source. It is a light reflector.
Point 6 – Birds did not exist before terrestrial animals.
Point 7 – All humans did not descend from one breeding pair.
Apparently, you are as profoundly ignorant about science as your god is.
"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.”
Except, of course, this is simply a nutter lie. The age of the earth is not a mystery. Sorry.
As a hard line moderate, I have an answer to the earth age debate- both the young earth and old earth creationists are correct. The answer is in the middle – when God created Adam, he created him as a fully formed man, not as a baby, not as a teenager, but at the peak of youth or early manhood. And the riddle to what came first, the chicken or the egg, can be applied to the age of the earth. God created earth in a matter of days, but when it was created, it already had aged just like Adam and all the other inhabitants of planet Earth. He created all things to bear fruit at inception, so its not a stretch to think that the earth already had instant maturity at creation.
Except that this means you choose to worship a trickster god, more akin to Loki, the Norse god of mischief.
By the way, the only way to make a 6,000 year old rock appear 4 billion years old is alter the weak nuclear force by many orders of magnitude. This would have released so much heat and radiation that earth would be a barren cinder.
People do have a right to choose to purposefully be ignorant. However, they should have no expectation of not being called on their idiocy.
Askurian, Well said. Your statement makes perfect sense. Primewonk's comment that he knows more about nuclear force than God does is kind of funny.
Praise God- Primewonk- you have unwittingly proved my point. It is indeed a feat that only one who is called God could accomplish – and in response to your weak argument about my idiocy, have you examined your fallacious idea of the big bang creating life, or is it on the backs of crystals, or is it aliens that dropped down? What is idiotic? Biologist Richard Dawkins' idea that aliens are responsible for earth, evolutionist Michael Ruse's assertion that we originated on the backs of crystals? What is more realistic? It is statistically improbable that a big bang occurred without a prime mover or designer. Have you or ANYONE in psuedo science found transitional fossils, and how many times did the late Harvard paleontologist Stephen Gould change his theory on naturalistic evolution? Punctuated equilibrium did not save him from the afterlife. So after all, who is the real idiot here? I am more of a realist – it is highly unlikely that the universe with all its irreducible complexity and ultra precise design, not to mention our ever increasing plunge towards entropy, came to being by simple chance. Or for that matter with all the glory lauded by evolutionary philosophy to the elevation of man as a species, how is it that in the "millennia" of human existence, we only have at the most thousands of years of actual verifiable historical records? Was man dumb and stupid all those millennia and then all of a sudden, literacy, art, science came into existence. Man turned from chimp to genius. That my friend is idiotic and the most fantastic story ever told, and exceptionally unique in the realm of human history.
@askurian
You consider life amazing and complex and so you insist that some god must have designed it. Why then do you not consider god's life amazing and complex enough to require a god who must have designed him?
"I don't know, therefore god"
you are stupid, with no brain. God created cell phone, tv, internet, and even electricity, your car you fool to drive every day.. Fool!
I'm sorry, "askurian" and "Don", but all of your assertions are unfounded. God is an element of mythology and therefore could not have created anything. Using my Idiomatic Expression Equivalency module (IEE), the expression that best matches the degree to which your assertions may represent truths is: "EPIC FAIL".
Don,
Why don't you ask for askurian's proof that what he said was true and not just an assertion?
My guess is because you know there is no proof......Greek mythology is just as valid.
Cheesemaker...Better yet, why don't you tell us your Moon Rock Story again. We all got a kick out of that one yesterday.
I'm sorry guys, but you are as scientifically ignorant as the god you choose to worship. Still waiting to here why you choose to worship a trickster god.
Don,
Here is a page from NASA's website, why don't you go tell them how silly they are?
http://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/index.cfm
Or you tell us more about you zombie apocalypse death cult where you practise symbolic cannibalism.
Cheese, I haven't practiced symbolic cannibalism in a while. Not sure what goes on in your neighborhood though.
Snake handling Don?
this is why i will never vote republican , because they are just plain dumb no other way to put it
And as an independent moderate who votes Democrat and Republican, I find your statement appalling. How can we expect conservatives to be tolerant, yet we ourselves practice intolerance towards their views? It is utterly hypocritical.
Your assertions are correct, "jason". Republicans are just plain dumb and there is no other way to put it.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Albert Einstein
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.” Al Einstein
Lack of understanding bible will never help Republican Party to win election. Creationism is evolution as god desired. God is always active and creating. Technology, computer. Programs are coming from god to understand god creationism and continuous creativity. Obamad and Democratic Party understand this, that is why Obama won election. Obama became true Christian and gave up Islam religion for same reason.
"Creationism is evolution as god desired. "
Then you need to explain why your god was so incredibly scientifically ignorant that he screwed up the whole order of creation in his book.
God did not screw up anything. God,s creation can not be comprehended by human minds. To comprehend creation theory, one needs to be able to comprehend god and his creatures. To comprehend god is not an easy matter, it needs god,s grace.
Apparently the biblical writers assumed they comprehended the mind of god enough to write it down. Creation isn't a theory. A theory require evidence that is testable in the natural world. A unseen god is not observable evidence whatsoever. It is merely an assertion of faith. That is not scientific.
Stop the argument ladies and gentlemen, Science and God are inclusive, for the study of God is Theology, before you tell me Theology is not a Science, look up what science is.
Science is true, god was created by people including scientists who could not be able to explains things when we knew so little about the earth and the universe. That is why when mankind knows more and more then less and less people believe in creatism.
Hui Wang- The definition of science.
"I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.” Give me a break. It's only a mystery to people who are in denial over the facts. Creationists are impossible for this very reason. They know they don't have a leg to stand on, so they will often settle for trying giving their own absurd theory equal standing to the well-known scientific facts. They're so transparently deceitful. Shame on CNN for legitimizing this pathetic, irresponsible movement.
Christians are accused of using shame all the time. Now you, too, are using it? The more things change.........