Your Nov. 27 editorial “Earth to Sen. Rubio” was disturbing. I am sick of reporters asking stupid “gotcha” questions that have nothing to do with anything.
No matter how Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio answered the question about when the Earth was created, he would have been wrong. What would the writer have considered a “courageous” answer?
I have been in the health field all my professional life and studied all kinds of science. So far, the exact age of the Earth is still only theory. The age of the Earth should not be a priority to our politicians in this time of economic hardship for so many Americans.
Why would this be of concern in electing a president? We re-elected President Obama, who in his 2008 campaign said that he was going to campaign in all 57 states.
Editorial shows Blade’s bias
With the nation facing a fiscal cliff, high unemployment, unrest in the Mideast, and unanswered questions about Benghazi, you chose to editorialize about Senator Rubio’s response to an inane question about how old the Earth is.
This shows your bias and lack of focus on what really matters to the nation.
North Wheeling Street
Church ‘visitor’ took further steps
In response to the Nov. 24 Readers’ Forum letter “Visiting churches fine; take next step”: Many people in Waterville, Maumee, and Perrysburg will vouch for John Knollman’s Christian fellowship.
He engaged in ministry and reached out to these communities by introducing and leading a Bible study.
He and his wife gave four nights of their time at four different churches each week during the three years in which that Bible study took place.
He made possible a faith-strengthening experience for many people, including me.
Plum Leaf Lane
Statistician should turn to fiscal cliff
Because statistician and blogger Nate Silver correctly predicted the presidential winner in all 50 states, why doesn’t he tell us what the odds are of us going over the fiscal cliff (“Successes add up for numbers crunchers; Computer models aid storm, political forecasts,” Nov. 11)?
I’ll bet they’re greater than the 91 percent probability he gave President Obama for getting re-elected.