Posted on 12/06/2012 9:47:52 AM PST by ksen
After dabbling in creationism earlier this month, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., clarified that he does believe that scientists know the Earth is “at least 4.5 billion years old.”
“There is no scientific debate on the age of the earth. I mean, it’s established pretty definitively, it’s at least 4.5 billion years old,” Rubio told Mike Allen of Politico. ”I was referring to a theological debate, which is a pretty healthy debate.
“The theological debate is, how do you reconcile with what science has definitively established with what you may think your faith teaches,” Rubio continued. “Now for me, actually, when it comes to the age of the earth, there is no conflict.”
GQ: How old do you think the Earth is?
Marco Rubio: I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to answer that. It’s one of the great mysteries.
The validity of radiometric dating is subject to the assumptions upon which it was developed.
The whole pracess started with an assumed age and expanded out from that position. No attempt was ever made to challenge that assumption.
Thank you for putting in perspective.
What I think many people challenge in questioning the old age of the earth is the unmitigated arrogance of scientists who claim (state) that they KNOW for sure the age of the earth, and if you dare to question their superior intellect by not accepting what they state, it throws them into a total tailspin, complete with pejoratives, personal attacks, infantile snarky remarks about the person's level of intelligence, etc.
Something about science seems to breed a cocky arrogance in its practitioners.
And considering how often today's scientific breakthrough is tomorrow's foolish myth, there's no reason for it.
Scientists CLAIM that science is constantly changing as new evidence comes in, and in that case that means what they had determined beforehand was wrong. So it's pretty arrogant of them to get into such a snit over people questioning their claims when by their own admission, most of what they've ever put forth is wrong.
It's to the benefit of evolutionists to go for the really old earth model. It's the only thing that will allow for enough time for their theory so that they can (try to) convince others that it's valid.
The ToE demands a very old earth. Take away the old earth and their theory has nothing to stand on.
Creationists teach that a gigantic surge of water carved out the Grand Canyon, in a short period of time, from a vast mud deposit which subsequently hardened into layers of stone. This argument does not hold up because:
(1) The Grand Canyon is immense; it is inconceivable that all that material could be removed in a short period of time.
(2) Recently exposed mud deposits have essentially no vertical stability; a trench more than 5 feet deep must be shored to keep it from collapsing. The Grand Canyon is a mile deep and has vertical walls of over a thousand feet in height.
(3) The Grand Canyon formation is cut down into an almost horizontal plateau. How could a surge of water on a horizontal surface attain the velocity to remove all that material? Answer: it could not; it would simply spread out over the plateau.
(4) There is no way that a huge deposit of mud could be transformed into the existing system of dozens of different kinds of rock strata extending in a consistent sequence over hundreds of square miles.
http://www.chem.tufts.edu/science/FrankSteiger/flood.htm
#4 is important in that if the Grand Canyon was “cut while it was still wet (mud deposited by Noah’s Flood?), and probably in a week or two”, you wouldn’t expect to see the many different types of rock strata and you also can’t explain why some types of animal and plant fossilization, long extinct are found in lower strata and not in the higher and why some types of animal and plant fossilization of more recent life is not found in the lower strata if all this took place over the course of a week or two.
It is reasonable to believe that a given sample of uranium bearing rock could possibly have formed with exactly the required proportions of daughter elements present to falsely present an appearance of being billions of years old. It is insanity to believe they all did.
“Sure, then apparently neither does the Pope and millions of other Christians. Science is useful. Creationism is useless.”
Apparently so...don’t know about their being Christians—true Christians keep on believing God’s Word.
Jesus didn’t think creationism was useless—
He said this when He was speaking to the Pharisees, the religious leaders of His day in Matthew 19:4: “He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE,”...[a quote of Genesis 1:27].
Jesus should know, for He was with God in the beginning when God spoke everything into being and then formed man and blew the breath of life into him. God says it like this in the gospel of John:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. [John 1:1-5}
And then, in John 1:9-14:
There was the true light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him.
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
As far as the millions who don’t believe God, in Matthew 7:13-23 Jesus says says that the gate to life is narrow and small, and He gives a warning:
“Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide, and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter by it. For the gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find it.
Beward of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes, nor figs from thistles, are they? A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord,
Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’
And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’
Jesus said that He is the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me,
May the Lord give you the grace to hear these words of His and act upon them. (Matthew 7:24-29)
Piety is not established on a sliding scale of how whacked out your cosmology is. Young earth creationists are not automatically more pious than old earth creationists.
A F R poster once claimed that all Bible believing Christians are geocentrists. Are you a geocentrist? Are you a Bible believing Christian? Do you think the Earth does not move because the Bible says so? Did you stop believing the Word?
I-68 at Sideling Hill in Maryland.
“Piety is not established on a sliding scale of how whacked out your cosmology is. Young earth creationists are not automatically more pious than old earth creationists.”
...where’d that come from?
I am a Christian and I believe God AND His Word, as I already told you. I study it hard and learn many things, by His grace and His indwelling Holy Spirit. With it He will judge the world, John 12:48.
It came from your delusion that the Pope isn’t a Christian due to him and millions of other Christians disagreeing with your wacky and useless creationism.
Not mine...God’s.
If the conservative "base" is now defined as troglodyte, knuckle-dragging creationist retards, God help us ever win another national election.
MOST of the responses I’ve received fall into the “perjorative” category. Funny that.
Ah, playing the pope card again, eh?
And just what does that have to do with anything besides thread hijacking?
It is only by the liberals, and God help you if you really believe that.
Typical.....
It shows how idiotic the typical creationist argument that to accept evolution is to not be a Christian actually is. It should hopefully clue in the delusional creationist that there is a larger world outside their echo chamber of useless antiscience zealots. And in many cases it exposes them as anti Catholic fanatics.
I never said anything about the Pope’s not being a Christian because he didn’t believe in evolution, (my post #106 that “allmendream” was referring to)...his remark that creationism is useless is a testimoney to his rejection of:
1) God as Creator of everything that has existence (the subject that we were on, albeit His creation of man also denies evolution),
2) God’s Word which reveals Himself to man as Creator, and
3) Jesus’ words referring to the fact of creation in Matthew 19:4.
However—whether pope or prince or peon—God also says that people who reject His Word are scoffers and fools who are headed to the place of destruction. His Word will judge them.
So if the Pope accept evolution (he does) he is going to hell. That clarified a lot!
Iceberg, steinberg...what’s the difference? :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.