I wrote this post in 2012, about Senator Marco Rubio’s answer to a question that’s interesting to consider 22 years later. Trump picked Senator Rubio as the Secretary of State. He might become a very good Secretary of State. I hope he is in terms of working with other nations to solve problems.

Nonetheless, the post that follows examines Rubio’s scientific ideas. It focuses on the implications of his response about the age of the earth. The age of the earth and evolution are important ideas taught in the nation’s public schools. For decades, organizations have used a variety of techniques to teach creation science and intelligent design (ID) along with evolution. Proponents of intelligent design have claimed that ID is science. Judge John Jones, a Federal judge, rebuked the Dover, PA school board. He said in his findings that ID can’t dissociate itself from “creation science,” which is clearly based on Biblical teachings.

Now, 20 years later, schools in some states are putting Bibles in classrooms. They are writing lesson plans based on Bible teaching for K-5 kids. We have to be aware that there are groups encouraging religious ideas to be incorporated in science, language arts, and history.

During the first Trump term, truth was viewed by Trumpeters as “fake news.” The assault on truth was a key part of Trump’s plan to wreck havoc on science (think EPA,) and public health (think COVID-19). Now, with a second Trump term, we need to be forthright and call out officials when they assault the truth.

So, let’s get on with Senator Marco Rubio.

Here is what I wrote about Marco Rubio in 2012

You would think that a United States Senator would have at least a rudimentary knowledge of geology.  The Senator, who was on the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, must use scientific knowledge to handle some of the committee’s issues. This is especially important for the subcommittee of Science & Space, where he was is a member.  He is well-educated with degrees from the University of South Florida and the University of Miami (Law).

Senator Rubio no doubt had a course in earth science when he was a middle school student in Miami, Florida. He also no doubt took biology courses in high school and at the University of South Florida. There, he earned a B.A. degree.  He received his degrees in the 1990s. This was not enough time for him to forget everything he learned in science classes.

He was asked about the age of earth. Yet, he said he wasn’t a scientist. He stated he was not qualified to answer.  What is the implication of that answer?  Does he mean that only “experts” like scientists can express a qualified opinion?  Does this mean that only lawyers, like himself, are qualified to give opinions about legal matters?  Here is Rubio’s full answer:

I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says. I can tell you what the Bible says. That’s a dispute amongst theologians. 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 (emphasis mine).

I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, There are multiple theories on how the universe was created. People in this country should have the opportunity to teach all of them. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. We never know if the Earth was created in 7 days or 7 actual eras. It’s one of the great mysteries.

Source: Politico by KEVIN ROBILLARD, 11/19/2012.

Economic value of geologic maps

William ‘Strata’ Smith would beg to differ.  In truth, knowing about the history of the earth, the age and composition of rock formations changed the world economy.  Simon Winchester in his book, The Map That Changed the World, describes an English canal digger named William Smith.

Smith discovered something remarkable. He found that the rocks he was digging were arranged in layers. Smith also noted that fossils varied from one place to another. By using fossils, he could “trace” layers around England.  According to Winchester, Smith realized that he was making a map that would show the ‘hidden’ earth.  He created a hand-painted geologic map that was eight feet high by six feet wide.

The creation of Smith’s geologic map fostered the world’s coal and oil industry. It also influenced its gold mining, highway systems, and railroad routes, according to Winchester (and most geologists would agree).  Mr. Rubio might want to know that there is a field of study called economic geology.

The geologic map of Georgia is valuable for learning about the age and type of rocks in Georgia. It also shows the educational and economic implications. Where might you find minerals if you want to make cat litter. Where would you find fossils that are more than 300 million years old?

School Science for Members of Congress

The answer Rubio gave will also surprise some middle and high school students. Those students have taken a few courses in science, especially earth science, biology, or astronomy.  In those courses, they most commonly studied geological time, rocks, minerals, and fossils. They also learned about techniques scientists use to date things that happened long ago.

But here is something that is more important.   Geology focuses on studying the Earth. It includes its history, structure, and the evolution of life. It also examines the processes that molded the Earth and affected its inhabitants.  Don’t you think that we should expect that men and woman elected to the U.S. Congress ought to know something about the planet on which they live?

Should members of Congress pass a literacy test? This test would include questions on science, political science, religion, economics, history of the U.S.  Just to be sure they have the knowledge needed to do their job?  Teachers, physicians, pedicurists, lawyers, and electricians need to be certified by a test. Why not members of Congress?

Is the Earth Really Billions of Years Old?

Archbishop Usher of Ireland was a highly regarded churchman and scholar (1581 – 1665). He established the Usher chronology by comparing written histories and Holy writ. Usher concluded that the earth was formed on Sunday, October 23, 4004 BC.  He then calculated the dates of other biblical events.  Critics challenged the “young Earth” of Usher.

This was especially true in the 19th Century with the development of the science of geology.  Usher’s views still were not different from some famous scientists.  Johannes Kepler’s earth was 3992 BC, and Sir Isaac Newton’s was c. 4000 BC).  Their views were not nonsense.

But, today we do have people who claim that the earth is only 9,000 years old.  A 9,000 year old earth is nonsense.  I am talking about former Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia who said:

I have found a lot of scientific data as a scientist. These data actually show that this is really a young Earth. I don’t believe that the Earth’s but about 9,000 years old. I believe it was created in six days as we know them. That’s what the Bible says.

Rep. Paul Broun

Senator Rubio might be surprised to find out who wrote the next account of the origin of earth. Representative Broun would be surprised. He could learn about the author of the account on the origin of life on earth.  Read on….

Here is one view of the universe, its origin, and emergence and development of life on Earth:

The universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the ‘Big Bang.’ Since then, it has been expanding and cooling. Gradually, the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms emerged. Later, galaxies and stars condensed. About 10 billion years after the Big Bang, planets formed. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of  life.

There is little consensus among scientists about how this first microscopic life originated. Nevertheless, they generally agree that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5–4 billion years ago. It has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related. So, we can be virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism.

Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences provides growing support for the theory of evolution. This theory accounts for the development and diversification of life on earth. Yet, controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution.¹

If most high school students were asked about the origin of the earth, they would probably agree with this account. They would also probably agree with the development of life described here.

Representative Paul Broun of Georgia would say the statement is straight from Hell.  The earth is only 9,000 years old, he would say.

Senator Rubio thinks that the science on the age of the earth is not settled. He ought to read Alex Knapp’s post on Forbes.  Rubio thinks there are multiple theories to explain the age of the earth.  He thinks the age of the earth is one of the great mysteries of the world.

Rubio is a Roman Catholic.  The quote that I included above was not written by a scientist.  It was written by a Catholic Cardinal in 2004.  When it was written, the author’s name was Cardinal Ratzinger.  He is Pope Benedict XVI (Papacy-2005-2013).  You can find the reference in the document titled Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God. Scroll to paragraph 63 to find the quote. These were plenary sessions held in Rome from 2000 to 2002. It was published in July 2004.

Would this information affect Rubio’s views? The head of the Catholic church accepts the scientific views on the history of earth. Does this knowledge impact his beliefs? What about the evolution of life on the planet?

I don’t know.

Say It Isn’t So

Are Rubio’s views simply fundamental religious beliefs?  Are his answers couched in politico speak?  Is he more concerned about what potential voters think of his view on a ‘touchy’ topic?  Would his answers on evolution, global warming and climate change, and cloning lead to the same conclusions?

Rubio’s education and religious beliefs should align with the established science of the age of earth and evolution. He appears fearful of science. Alternatively, he might adhere to the conservative world view based on a strict father or authoritarian figure.  Is he beholden to the radical right of the Republican party when he gives anti-science answers?

Anti-Science?

In George Lakoff’s view, we can understand one’s position on issues like the “age of the earth.” This is possible by understanding his research on deep framing. Deep framing involves the moral and political principles that cut across issues. These principles are needed before “slogans or clever phrases” can have meaning with the public.  Lakoff, nonetheless, believes that politics is about values and how to communicate them, not necessarily about issues.  Lakoff writes in his book, Thinking Points, that

Politics is about values. It involves communication. Voters trust a candidate to do what is right. It is about believing in a candidate’s worldview and identifying with it. And it is about symbolism.

Rubio’s answer to the question the earth’s age is about the values he holds about truth and knowledge.  He claims that the age of the earth is a great mystery. In doing so, he selects an authoritarian source of knowledge that relies on beliefs. This choice is not grounded in science, reason, or inquiry.  

Rubio’s position is based on the Strict Father Model that Lakoff has developed that focuses on authority and control.  In the case of the age of the earth, religious authority provides answers based on faith. These answers contrast with those from the field of geology.  Conservatives think that they lose control if they accept data, knowledge, concepts and principles established by science.  There is little authority in the field of science.  

There is no president or moral leader of science.  For conservatives, values originate from a moral authority. This authority includes God, the president, the parents, the teacher, and commanding officer, among others (Lakoff, Thinking Points).

Progressives have turned to the keyboard on their blogs and in newspaper articles after Rubio’s comments. It is important for them to point out what their values are. These values frame their positions on issues.  What values underscore why they oppose anti-science comments spread by members of Congress like Rubio?

What are the values that move you to agree or disagree with Rubio’s view on the age of the Earth?

Footnotes

1. Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God, International Theologic Commission, It was then submitted to Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the President of the Commission, who has give his permission for its publication. ↩︎