Religion
See other Religion Articles
Title: Galileo Was Wrong, The Church Was Right
Source:
Way Out There
URL Source: [None]
Published: Sep 14, 2010
Author: Assorted Wingnuts
Post Date: 2010-09-14 20:00:56 by Skip Intro
Keywords: None
Views: 20917
Comments: 35
Poster Comment: Make your reservations now. This event is sure to sell out soon.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Make sure you buy the book before you attend.
"Our quest for the lesser evil has arrived at an impasse. On one hand we have a world-class Doublethinker who expects us to thank him for keeping promises he has vigorously broken and to accept the cynical notion that war is peace. On the other we have a mob of flesh-eating galoots who promise to give us Orwell’s Hate Week 52 weeks a year for as long as it takes them to bring about Armageddon. " — Jeff Huber
Those who read the Bible always knew the earth was round.
It is a myth that Galileo waged a war of science against dogma. Frankly, there were more scientific problems with heliocentrism at the time than just adding more epicycles to the Ptolemaic system. Galileo was persecuted by the Church for being an asshole. And it wasn't really very much of a "persecution."
Why do you attempt to argue from such a corrupt knowledge base? Do you realize that EVERYONE knows that you're lying here? Copernicus' mathematical model for The Revolution of Celestial Spheres was published 20 years before Galileo was even born. /dickwad Why don't you stay at LP, Paddy? The dumb seem to thrive there - with a couple exceptions, Too Conservative, We The People...
So, is anybody going to the conference?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_heliocentrism#Reference-Gingerich-2004 Acceptance of Copernican heliocentrism From publication until about 1700, few astronomers were convinced by the Copernican system, though the book was relatively widely circulated (around 500 copies of the first and second editions have survived, which is a large number by the scientific standards of the time). --- Galileo died before 1600 and contemporary scientists in 1700, were still, by and large, not impressed by heliocentrism.
ROFLMAO...what happened to Galileo barely a generation before, YA DICKHEAD? HE DIED UNDER HOUSE ARREST. Ya ***think*** they wanted to share his fate? Please, Padlock...I'm not SOD. I'm not Joe Snuffy. I'm not Otis.
Ya ***think*** they wanted to share his fate? You are completely clueless as to the as to the scientific problems with accepting heliocentrism at that rime. HE DIED UNDER HOUSE ARREST. For his political gestures in mocking the Pope, not for scientific beliefs. It's not what you don't know; its what you think you know that is bullshit war=bullshit
Putting aside the issue that you don't even know when Galileo died, dickhead, the "problem" can be summed up in three words: The Catholic Church. By 1700, the Renaissance, then the Age of Reason then the Enlightenment had successfully supplanted the moronics perpetrated by religion and Scientists were able to go about their work without be shackled for it...unless they were female or black...
That other thread...over there...is getting some traffic.
Typo Should have read 1700, but doesn't change the point that decades after Galileos's death, scientists still weren't convinced with heliocentrism. He wasn't "punished" by the church for any scientific reasons.
LF has an edit feature, dickhead. Not that I believe you.
Bullshit.
I saw. Amazing how none except Lubey and calcon are registered here. I was also struck by Lubey's lucidness. All he does here is write gay porn. Typical of the LP "men"...they're women [and the women are men.]
The church didn't invent the ptolemaic system. The Catholic Church. By 1700, the Renaissance, then the Age of Reason then the Enlightenment had successfully supplanted the moronics perpetrated by religion and Scientists You can't present the first bit of evidence that the Church ever prosecuted anybody because of their scientific belief in heliocentrism. I won't say the church wasn't too involved in government at the time, but galieo was punished for being a dick, not for science, sort of like you.
Yea so? Say, "Good Night, Paddy..."
Galileo was persecuted and prosecuted EXACTLY for that, dickhead. Galileo was ordered to stand trial on suspicion of heresy in 1633. The sentence of the Inquisition was in three essential parts: * Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy," namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions. * He was sentenced to formal imprisonment at the pleasure of the Inquisition. On the following day this was commuted to house arrest, which he remained under for the rest of his life. * His offending Dialogue was banned; and in an action not announced at the trial, publication of any of his works was forbidden, including any he might write in the future.
Dumbass, it was a show trial, like Scooter Libby. If he had acted in any kind of a diplomatic manner, he never would have been prosecuted. Geez, he lived a life a of luxury after his house arrest. Either prove the scientists years after his death were intimatated by the Church, or just go have another beer.
The fact is that the church didn't care all that much about what Copernicus and Galileo thought about the order of the universe, scientifically speaking. Copernicus' book on the subject circulated for seventy years without any trouble at all. It was the scientists of the day who opposed the theory, because it went against the received wisdom of Aristotle. Copernicus believed that his theory actually described the universe the way it was, and this was unacceptable to the academics. When Galileo published his ideas, it was the ridicule of fellow astronomers that he feared, not the church. According to Aristotle, the earth was at the center of the universe, and all the rest of the universe was situated in concentric spheres around it. From the moon out, all was thought to be perfect and unchanging. The earth, however, was obviously changing and thus imperfect. All matter in the universe was thought to fall downward toward the center of the earth. The earth is therefore like the trash bin of the universe; it was no compliment to man to emphasize his place on earth. In other words, to be at the center of the universe was not a good thing! To now say that the earth was out with other planets where things had to be perfect was to seriously undercut Aristotle's ideas. So when Galileo published his notions it was the ridicule of fellow astronomers that he feared, not the church. It's true that Galileo got into hot water with the church, but it was not because his theory moved man physically from the center of the universe; that was a good thing, given Aristotle's views. Man was already considered small in the universe. Most people already believed that the earth was created for God, not for man. "The doctrine that the earth exists for man's use," says Philip Sampson, "derives from Greek philosophy, not the Bible."{7} Thus, the Copernican theory "ennobled" the status of the earth by making it a planet. So the church in general didn't see the heliocentric theory as a demotion. The fact is that Galileo was on good terms with the church for a long time, even while advancing his theory. He made sure that the idea he was attacking of the incorruptibility of the universe with its perfect heavens and imperfect earth was an Aristotelian belief and not a doctrine of the church. "Indeed," says Sampson, "the church largely accepted his conclusions, although the die-hard Aristotelians in the universities did not. . . . Far from being constantly harried by obscurantist priests, he was feted by cardinals, received by Pope Paul V and befriended by the future Pope Urban VIII."{8} As historian George Santillana wrote in 1958, "It has been known for a long time that a major part of the church intellectuals were on the side of Galileo, while the clearest opposition to him came from secular circles."{9} He wasn't afraid of the church; he feared the ridicule of his fellow scientists! What did get Galileo in trouble with the church were two things. First, because the church had historically followed Aristotle (as did secularists) in interpreting scientific data, it wanted hard evidence to support Galileo's views, which he did not have. For Galileo to insist that his theory was true to the way things really were was to step outside proper scientific boundaries. He simply didn't have enough hard data to make such a claim. The problem, then, wasn't between religion and science, but between methods of interpreting the data. But this, in itself, wasn't enough to bring the church down on him. The bigger problem was Galileo's manner of promoting his beliefs. To do so, he reinterpreted Scripture in contradiction to traditional understandings, which ran counter to the dictates of the Council of Trent. Perhaps even worse was his mockery of the pope. His treatise, Dialogue Concerning the Chief World Systems, took the form of a debate. The character that took Aristotle's view against the heliocentric theory was called Simplicio. His "role in the dialogue is to be a kind of Aunt Sally to be knocked down by Galileo. . . .Galileo puts into Simplicio's mouth a favorite argument used by his friend Pope Urban VIII and then mocks it. In other words, he concluded his treatise by effectively calling the very pope who had befriended him a simpleton for not agreeing with Galileo. This was not a wise move," says Sampson, "and the rest is history."{10} In fact, Galileo himself believed that the major cause of his trouble was the charge that he had made fun of the pope, not that he thought the earth moved. So the condemnation of Galileo did not result from some basic conflict between science and religion. It "was the result of the complex interplay of untoward political circumstances, political ambitions, and wounded prides."{11} However, the myth continues to bolster the status of secular, naturalistic thought by making religion look bad.
Libby is Female Borderline.
Had Galileo ACTUALLY uttered, "It still moves" he'd have been put to death, It's morning, Paddy, and you still look stupid. If the church doesn't try to control and discount science - which it is still trying to do, btw - there is no trial, show or otherwise. Galileo was persectured and prosectuted for his work and his beliefs. END OF STORY. But at the least, you learned that Galileo died in 1642.
The bigger problem was Galileo's manner of promoting his beliefs. To do so, he reinterpreted Scripture in contradiction to traditional understandings, which ran counter to the dictates of the Council of Trent. Perhaps even worse was his mockery of the pope. You are still an idiot even after the real facts have been demonstrated to you. END OF STORY
You don't even get this right. The story was he muttered the phrase in Latin under his breath, but that is now considered a tall tale.
Your stupid credentials are now firmly entrenched. This is what I ACTUALLY wrote, dickhead: Had Galileo ACTUALLY uttered, "It still moves" he'd have been put to death.
Nothing but unfounded speculation by secularists to support their meme. The fact is the Pope gave Galileo permission to present a balanced discussion of Copernican and Ptolemaic systems, and he chose to mock the pope with a derisive "I'm right" book. Frankly, what Galileo did is exactly what science SHOULD NOT BE. The matter was far from settled at the time, even among scientists.
I'm not a secular, naturalistic type and I still think the Galileo story makes religion look bad.
"Were you ever in the music or song writing business?" ... e_type_jagoff to Mudboy lol ..... AND ....... "But his decent into vile absurdity is still actually kind of sad and pitiful really" .... mad doggie
If you mean by the Church being to much of a Government authority, I would agree. If you buy into the curbing science myth, I of course don't agree.
I like Paddy when he makes himself look dumb. Just wait until we discuss Salem Village and he justifies impressment and burning because the data at the time pointed to the existence of witches and that contrary data wasn't universally accepted yet.
Giordano Bruno - burned at the stake for his defense of Copernicus Galileo - died under house arrest for heresy Tommaso Campanella - tortured for his defense of Galileo Rene Descartes - persecuted by the Church for his defense of Copernicus and Galileo Those are just the ones of the top of my head...
Giordano Bruno - burned at the stake for his defense of Copernicus Executed for heretical theological beliefs having nothing to do with science. Galileo - died under house arrest for heresy He lived a life of luxury. his punishment had not thing to do with science, but his mockery of the Pope. Tommaso Campanella He was imprisoned for leading a conspiracy against local government to establish his on theological society based on the views of Joachim of Fiore, not for anything to do with science. Rene Descartes "persecuted" (really just criticized) for proposed atheist beliefs, which he denied. Had nothing to do with any scientific beliefs, though.
Another way the Galileo story makes religion look bad was what he did to his daughters (nothing pervy, don't get excited all you freaks reading this). It was the way of the times, but that was because of the church. That made them look worse than what they did to Galileo.
"Were you ever in the music or song writing business?" ... e_type_jagoff to Mudboy lol ..... AND ....... "But his decent into vile absurdity is still actually kind of sad and pitiful really" .... mad doggie
#2. To: Skip Intro (#1)
#3. To: Skip Intro (#0)
#4. To: no gnu taxes (#3)
(Edited)
Frankly, there were more scientific problems with heliocentrism at the time than just adding more epicycles to the Ptolemaic system.
#5. To: All (#0)
#6. To: war (#4)
(Edited)
#7. To: no gnu taxes (#6)
From publication until about 1700, few astronomers were convinced by the Copernican system, though the book was relatively widely circulated (around 500 copies of the first and second editions have survived, which is a large number by the scientific standards of the time).
#8. To: war (#7)
ROFLMAO...what happened to Galileo barely a generation before, YA DICKHEAD? HE DIED UNDER HOUSE ARREST.
#9. To: no gnu taxes (#6)
Galileo died before 1600
#10. To: no gnu taxes (#8)
(Edited)
You are completely clueless as to the as to the scientific problems with accepting heliocentrism at that rime.
#11. To: war (#7)
...I'm not SOD.
#12. To: war (#10)
#13. To: no gnu taxes (#12)
Typo
#14. To: no gnu taxes (#12)
He wasn't "punished" by the church for any scientific reasons.
#15. To: Fred Mertz (#11)
(Edited)
#16. To: war (#10)
#17. To: no gnu taxes (#16)
The church didn't invent the ptolemaic system.
#18. To: no gnu taxes (#16)
(Edited)
that the Church ever prosecuted anybody because of their scientific belief in heliocentrism.
#19. To: war (#18)
#20. To: war (#18)
#21. To: war (#15)
Typical of the LP "men"...they're women [and the women are men.]
#22. To: no gnu taxes (#19)
(Edited)
#23. To: war (#22)
What did get Galileo in trouble with the church were two things. First, because the church had historically followed Aristotle (as did secularists) in interpreting scientific data, it wanted hard evidence to support Galileo's views, which he did not have. For Galileo to insist that his theory was true to the way things really were was to step outside proper scientific boundaries. He simply didn't have enough hard data to make such a claim. The problem, then, wasn't between religion and science, but between methods of interpreting the data. But this, in itself, wasn't enough to bring the church down on him.
#24. To: no gnu taxes (#23)
But at the least, you learned that Galileo died in 1642.
#25. To: war (#22)
Had Galileo ACTUALLY uttered, "It still moves" he'd have been put to death,
#26. To: no gnu taxes (#25)
You don't even get this right.
#27. To: war (#26)
#28. To: no gnu taxes (#27)
But at the least, you learned that Galileo died in 1642.
#29. To: no gnu taxes (#20)
However, the myth continues to bolster the status of secular, naturalistic thought by making religion look bad.
#30. To: Abu el Banat (#29)
the Galileo story makes religion look bad.
#31. To: Abu el Banat (#29)
I'm not a secular, naturalistic type and I still think the Galileo story makes religion look bad.
#32. To: no gnu taxes (#30)
(Edited)
#33. To: war (#32)
#34. To: no gnu taxes (#33)
But at the least, you learned that Galileo died in 1642.
#35. To: war (#31)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]