Senator Marco Rubio, known for his lack of scientific training, was quoted as using the disclaimer for what might end up being one too many times.
Rubio has been quoted as using "I am not a scientist" in response to the following questions:
"Is climate change a real phenomenon, in your opinion?"
"Do you believe in evolution?"
"Is our food supply being contaminated with unhealthy additives?"
"Do you think that space exploration is important?"
"Do fossil fuels cause pollution?"
"Do you think that fracking could be causing earthquakes?"
"Is it important to protect drinking water from industrial pollution?"
"Do you support any special interest that you haven't received campaign contributions from?"
"How do you spell potato?"
He was also asked if he believed that dinosaurs were real, to which he replied: "I didn't read it in the Bible."
When asked about dinosaur fossils that are displayed in many museums around the world he said "I'm not a scientist."
When it was pointed out Senator Rubio that even if he wasn't a scientist his constituents relied on him to make important decisions about some of these topics he almost replied, "I'm not a scientist" but stopped himself.
Asked if he would consider changing his opinion on an issue based on findings agreed upon by the vast majority of the scientific community on some of these topics he stated "no."
When asked to elaborate Senator Rubio stated, "There are some topics that cut to the heart of American values, and in my heart I know that I am on the right side of those debates. While science and fact can sometimes be helpful tools, I prefer to put my faith in the Lord and trust that he will lead this blessed country in the right direction."
When pressured to explain if he felt that declaring himself not a scientist could be seen as an attempt to excuse ignoring scientific fact in the name of satisfying the agenda of special interests that have financially supported him, Rubio angrily replied, "When I say I'm not a scientist it is because I am not a scientist. If you want someone who bases their understanding and decision making on fact then elect that guy, because I'm not him. Clearly, enough of my constituents believe the way I do things is the right way to do them or I wouldn't have gotten elected. If you don't like it you can move to a country where their representatives take into account nebulous concepts like scientific method and observation. Me and plenty of other Americans know that this is a special country, and with God on our side everything will always fall in our favor in the end."
Finally, asked to explain how someone who has a inflexible agenda set by campaign contributors and special interest groups could possibly represent an average American citizen he predictably replied, "I'm not a scientist."
