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.
“..Someone who accepts Jesus as their savior is a Christian. The Pope is not (just) a Christian, he is also the leader of about a billion Christians, and a renowned Biblical scholar...”
“..Not all who cry , Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that doeth the will of the Father
(in Heaven)” “ Even the devils believe and tremble.....”
The “pope” is human, therefore fallible, He is also Wrong, so are you. He is only a “leader” of a sect of people, and does not represent the majority of Christians and their respective faiths.
“..It is a fact that the less educated .... are a creationist.....”
This is an absurd statement,it shows ignorance to the highest degree. I am educated, therefore you put me in this category.(not even in the misguided one at that!!)
“... Creationism is useless because it leads to no further discovery or prediction. It is an ‘answer’ that leads nowhere.,,,”
Not true! most of the early scientist were creationist. And for your information, creationist believe in science and discovery (HOW ridiculous). Science FACTS support the bible, NOT the other way around.
“... A chimp .....look at the DNA of a chimp and compare it to a human and a gorilla .....either deal with or not...”
WHAT are you trying to say??? we came from apes??? Just say it!!! You believe we evolved from lesser forms??? say it!!!
“... “evilution?” How cretarded....”
Atheistic Evolution (as accepted) is Evil, Those accepting it are evil or ignorant. (since it is NOT based on science, but more of a belief system)
“..... What explanation are you going to use ........bacteria that plague humans?.....”
SIN
“...How do you explain how all present species.......from a rodent ‘kind’?.....”
Observable and proven. The varieties within species is an established fact.
“......Thanks. I will pray for you......”
Thanks! I need all the prayers I can get!!!!
However,....(only) “..the prayers of a righteous man availeth much...”
It is a true statement that acceptance of Jesus Christ as Savior is Christian. I have heard it said ignorance is not a sin but Peter describes the majority as being willingly ignorant about there being THREE different heaven/earth ages. That first heaven/earth world/age that was destroyed, and there was even a flood and nothing in flesh survived. I have yet to see the pope demonstrating any Biblical scholarship regarding Peter's own words.
Do you still believe that the gap between Africa and South America formed in around 12 months?
So, technically there is no need of 12 months, if they were never connected.
Good question though
The Hebrew word for "broken up" is baga and is used in other Old Testament passages (Zechariah 14:4; Numbers 16:31) to refer to the geologic phenomena of faulting. The mechanism for retreat of the Flood waters is also associated with tectonics. Psalm 104:6,7 describes the abating of the waters which stood above the mountains; the eighth verse properly translated says, "The mountains rose up; the valleys sank down." It is interesting to note that the "mountains of Ararat" (Genesis 8:4), the resting place of the Ark after the 150th day of the Flood, are in a tectonically active region at the junction of three lithospheric plates.
Ref: J. F. Dewey, et al., Plate tectonics and the evolution of the alpine system: Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull., v. 84, 1973,
"One year following Watson and Crick’s Nobel ceremony, chemist Emile Zuckerkandl observed that the protein sequence of hemoglobin in humans and the gorilla differed by only 1 out of 287 amino acids. Zuckerkandl noted: “From the point of view of hemoglobin structure, it appears that the gorilla is just an abnormal human, or man an abnormal gorilla, and the two species form actually one continuous population” (1963, p. 247). "
"Jonathan Marks, (department of anthropology, University of California, Berkeley) has pointed out the often-overlooked problem with this “similarity” line of thinking."
"Because DNA is a linear array of those four bases—A,G,C, and T—only four possibilities exist at any specific point in a DNA sequence. The laws of chance tell us that two random sequences from species that have no ancestry in common will match at about one in every four sites. Thus even two unrelated DNA sequences will be 25 percent identical, not 0 percent identical (2000, p. B-7).
Therefore a human and any earthly DNA-based life form must be at least 25% identical. Would it be correct, then, to state that daffodils are “one-quarter human”? The idea that a flower is one-quarter human is neither profound nor enlightening; it is outlandishly ridiculous! There is hardly any biological comparison that could be conducted that would make daffodils human—except perhaps DNA. Marks went on to concede: Moreover, the genetic comparison is misleading because it ignores qualitative differences among genomes.... Thus, even among such close relatives as human and chimpanzee, we find that the chimp’s genome is estimated to be about 10 percent larger than the human’s; that one human chromosome contains a fusion of two small chimpanzee chromosomes; and that the tips of each chimpanzee chromosome contain a DNA sequence that is not present in humans (B-7, emp. added).
The truth is, if we consider the absolute amount of genetic material when comparing primates and humans, the 1-2% difference in DNA represents approximately 80 million different nucleotides (compared to the 3-4 billion nucleotides that make up the entire human genome). To help make this number understandable, consider the fact that if evolutionists had to pay you one penny for every nucleotide in that 1-2% difference between the human and the chimp, you would walk away with $800,000. Given those proportions, 1-2% does not appear so small, does it? "
"One of the downfalls of previous molecular genetic studies has been the limit at which chimpanzees and humans could be compared accurately. Scientists often would use only 30 or 40 known proteins or nucleic acid sequences, and then from those extrapolate their results for the entire genome. Today, however, we have the majority of the human genome sequences, practically all of which have been released and made public. This allows scientists to compare every single nucleotide base pair between humans and primates—something that was not possible prior to the human genome project. In January 2002, a study was published in which scientists had constructed and analyzed a first-generation human chimpanzee comparative genomic map. This study compared the alignments of 77,461 chimpanzee bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) end sequences to human genomic sequences. Fujiyama and colleagues “detected candidate positions, including two clusters on human chromosome 21, that suggest large, nonrandom regions of differences between the two genomes” (2002, 295:131). In other words, the comparison revealed some “large” differences between the genomes of chimps and humans.
Amazingly, the authors found that only 48.6% of the whole human genome matched chimpanzee nucleotide sequences. [Only 4.8% of the human Y chromosome could be matched to chimpanzee sequences.] This study compared the alignments of 77,461 chimpanzee sequences to human genomic sequences obtained from public databases. Of these, 36,940 end sequences were unable to be mapped to the human genome (295:131). Almost 15,000 of those sequences that did not match human sequences were speculated to “correspond to unsequenced human regions or are from chimpanzee regions that have diverged substantially from humans or did not match for other unknown reasons” (295:132). While the authors noted that the quality and usefulness of the map should “increasingly improve as the finishing of the human genome sequence proceeds” (295:134), the data already support what creationists have said for years—the 98-99% figure representing DNA similarity is grossly misleading, as revealed in a study carried out by Roy Britten of the California Institute of Technology (see Britten, 2002). .."
REFERENCES:
Barbulescu, Madalina, Geoffrey Turner, Mei Su, Rachel Kim, Michael I. Jensen-Seaman, Amos S. Deinard, Kenneth K. Kidd, and Jack Lentz (2001), “A HERV-K Provirus in Chimpanzees, Bonobos, and Gorillas, but not Humans,” Current Biology, 11:779-783.
Britten, Roy J. (2002), “Divergence between Samples of Chimpanzee and Human DNA Sequences is 5%, Counting Intels,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99:13633-13635, October 15.
Coghlan, Andy (2002), “Human-chimp DNA Difference Trebled,ׇ [On-line], URL: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992833, September 23.
Fix, William R. (1984), The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution (New York: Macmillan).
Fujiyama, Asao, Hidemi Watanabe, et al., (2002), “Construction and Analysis of a Human-Chimpanzee Comparative Clone Map,” Science, 295:131-134, January 4.
Lyons, Eric and Bert Thompson (2002a), “In the ‘Image and Likeness of God’ [Part I],” Reason & Revelation, 22:17-23, March.
Lyons, Eric and Bert Thompson (2002b), “In the ‘Image and Likeness of God’ [Part II],” Reason & Revelation, 22:25-31, April.
REFERENCES
Marks, Jonathan (2000), “98% Alike? (What Similarity to Apes Tells Us About Our Understanding of Genetics),” The Chronicle of Higher Education, May 12.
Gardner, Eldon J. (1968), Principles of Genetics (New York: John Wiley and Sons).
King, Mary-Claire and A.C. Wilson (1975), “Evolution at Two Levels in Humans and Chimpanzees,” Science, 188:107-116, April 11.
Morgan, Elaine (1989), The Aquatic Ape: A Theory of Human Evolution (London: Souvenir Press).
Pennisi, Elizabeth (2002), “Jumbled DNA Separates Chimps and Humans,” Science, 298:719-721, October 25.
Shouse, Ben (2002), “Revisiting the Numbers: Human Genes and Whales,” Science, 295:1457, February 22.
Sinnot, E.W., L.C. Dunn, and T. Dobzhansky (1958), Principles of Genetics (Columbus, OH: McGraw Hill) fifth edition.
Schwabe, Christian (1986), “On the Validity of Molecular Evolution,” Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 11:280-283, July. Toder, R. F. Grutzner, T. Haaf, and E. Bausch (2001), “Species-Specific Evolution of Repeated DNA sequences in Great Apes,” Chromosome Research, 9:431-435.
Zuckerkandl, Emile (1963), “Perspectives in Molecular Anthropology,” Classification and Human Evolution, ed. S.L. Washburn (Chicago, IL: Aldine).
Muchmore, Elaine A., Sandra Diaz, and Ajit Varki (1998), “A Structural Difference Between the Cell Surfaces of Humans and the Great Apes,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 107[2]:187-198, October.
Apologetics Press, Inc.
Genesis states when the Earth “grew” by naming the person during whose life the shifts occured.
Read it and get educated.
>> “There are many ways to test a theory. The estimate of the distance between galaxies is much more than a guess” <<
.
That statement displays your ignorance of the obvious physical fact that the expansion of the universe also concurrently expanded its time component, thus the theory is comic book stuff.
It was never offered honestly, it’s just hubris.
.
How could he be?
He embraces the Pharisaical Nicolaitan model that the RCC is founded on, thus, supporting that which The Lord YHVH said that he hates. Do Christians deliberately do what Christ hates?
You cannot be Pagan and Christian at the same time.
>> “Someone who accepts Jesus as their savior is a Christian.” <<
.
That acceptance must be in all things, trusting in God’s inerrant word to lead in all parts of your life, not selecting out what you choose.
.
>> “Creationism is useless because it leads to no further discovery or prediction. It is an ‘answer’ that leads nowhere.” <<
A clear rejection of Christ!
HILARIOUS!!!
Funny!
It is not an absurd statement to point out that the less educated someone is the more likely they are to be a creationist - and even a few thousand educated creationists in no way makes it not a fact. The highest proportion of creationist belief in the USA is among those with a High School education or less. The lowest proportion is among those with graduate degrees. Do you understand how stupid you sound when I point out a fact about an entire population and you say it is absurd because of one contrary example?
The less educated someone is the more likely it is that they are a creationist.
There is no atheistic theory of evolution. Just as there is no atheistic theory of geology. Or an atheistic theory of gravity. Or an atheistic theory of radiometric decay.
So apparently you have no problem with a rat and a mouse evolving from a common ancestor - just humans and chimps evolving from a common ancestor. Apparently when you need evolution it happens at thousands of times the rate proposed by evolutionary biologists - but only within undefined “kinds” - for whatever reason.
What if I pointed out to you that the genetic difference between a mouse and a rat was much more than the genetic difference between a human and a chimp? Why is a 3% genetic change acceptable among rodents - but a 1.5% genetic change not acceptable among primates?
And what theory are you going to use to explain bacterial evolution of antibiotic resistance again?
“SIN” is not a scientific theory. You may think no scientific theory is necessary to describe and predict (and prevent) the development of antibiotic resistance - but such willful ignorance is dangerous.
If you do not understand geocentrism, then you have not studied God’s word, and are not likely a believer.
All of your posts would be hillarious were they not offered so seriously.
You’re a sad case.
You’re a complete Biblical illiterate, and yet you’re not a creationist; guess your theory fails. - Shocking!
I guess the Pope (a renowned Biblical scholar and author of several books on the Bible) hasn't studied God's word either - because he isn't a geocentrist.
The typical creationist refrain - ‘to disagree with me and my view is to disagree with the Bible and God and to go to hell’. May as well go all the way down the rabbit hole to GEOCENTRISM!!!
LOL!!!!
I will pray for you.
The pope is a pagan fool and a deliberate deceiver.
Bible scholar? LOL!
Talk about proving my point!
Whatever you need to tell yourself to make yourself feel better about being a geocentrist, and a creationist, and having a useless and non-predictive and ludicrous cosmology!
Pick one item from your response that you want address and I'll do it. You have not read or thought anything through. I can quote evolutionist, admitting to weak, and lack of evidence to support their theories.
YOU need to educate your self, First in Biology, then Geology, then come back with a serious question to debate.
By the way, it only takes one example to BLOW a theory,statement or doctrine “out of water”
An atheist believes there was no “god”, we are here because of chance or “spontaneous generation”, DEBUNKED.
A liberal (atheist) ignore the facts and picks what they choose to believe.
By the way what “god” do you pray to????
IT does not appear to be The God that can create in 6 days what he will.
If you continue with “straw man” arguments, and false statements, I shant waste my time.
Come back when you have educated yourself. Even evilutionist I have talked to and atheist, have better arguments.
“...LOL!!! Sure he is.
Talk about proving my point!
....”
You are showing your true colors.....
Does your god have horns????
You need to read History on scientific discovery.
You can not even present an argument on facts.
(I am sure you apply your statements to me as well) You do not answer my arguments, or citations, you want just to blow. Judging by your replies to me and others, you are not a seeker of TRUTH, Since you are not a serious person,... Thanks, I will not waste anymore time on you, (except sniping). SY
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.