Marco Rubio in President 2016
 

throws hat into the ring by demonstrating to conservative voters that he hates science

http://www.gq.com/news-politics/poli...-december-2012

Or that opinions on science are irrelevant to politics.

Anybody that says science is a matter of opinion or that it's not relevant to the running of our country is making a partisan statement.

I don't think Rubio believes what he's saying. He's mouthing the republican primary script because he knows that fundamentalist christian conservatives won't vote for a president who supports things like science, reality, etc.

this is why Chris Christie won't be in president ever. because he can't lie like rubio

teabaggers better get a fundamentalist out to Iowa and start campaigning asap

fixed

Idiocracy is realz

"I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries."

lulz

Basically anyone who answers that question as anything other than very simply "A few billion years old," is a fucking moron. And we can /thread. I mean any time someone actually needs a paragraph to come up with a number... you know they're just Monteing.

7 days or 7 actual eras

God timed it. It was seven days.

lol i really didnt expect this to hit so many media outlets. its like we're getting the fall of 2016 out of the way already

Gotta start callin these dumb asses out

in his defense i think its just a slow news cycle. but its starting to show how tight of a corner the party is in. christie is pretty much the only candidate living in the 21st century and even if he's nominated he'll still have to carry their baggage

Also in his defense he has a lot of religious fuckheads who he desperately needs to keep happy by pretending science doesn't exist.

It's called "religion". Some people believe in it, some don't. Science is constantly changing.

Holy shit are you the Bible?

:erm:

if we came from monkeys why arent monkeys coming out of us

Science is constantly changing, though. Or at least, our understanding of science.

yes but science relies on evidence and experimentation whereas religion relies on various interpretations of texts written thousands of years ago

so like science would prove that a table stays on the ground because of gravity and present a mathematical framework to explain it and religion just explains everything by GOD WILLS IT

so shut up and DIE

All the talking up of this guy and Ive never seen it. Him and Jindal. Such a horrible answer. Hes not a scientist? no shit, must be some other Rubio.

damn bold and underlined

lol bobby jindal

OMGZ OBAMERZ IS NOT DOING ENUF 4 GULF SPILL SEE UR Oh wait okay n/m

INVISIBLE SKY MAN KNOWS WHAT DO

christie does is job, and has to apologize for it to his party

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/us....html?hp&_r=1&

science is a method of determining probabilities. science is not "changing," it recognizes that it cannot claim objectivity, only identify likelihoods

either you typed that while stoned or you don't know jack shit about it

so u think ur all that bc u know it's called "religion"

I'm not religious.

But religion doesn't really change. The book is there. Science is always changing. Einstein's theory of relativity was thought to be concrete, but was proven wrong. Just an example.

Who proved it wrong?

god

Ipso facto.

Really

Dead. Wrong.

Just like that idiot Copernicus.

To be fair, last year it looked like it. What was it, CERN experiment? However, this year they couldn't prove their own discovery, so it's still 1:0 for Einstein.

They were unsuccessful in velocitating neutrinos faster than the speed of light, as predicted.