|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4856 days) Posts: 310 From: Broomfield Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Evolution Definition Shell Game | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
On the Galileo issue.
Galileo and Copernicus both worked in an institution funded and supported by the Catholic church and their work was only possible because of its patronage. The idea then that Catholic church supressed science is nonsense; in fact, it was its biggest supporter. Galileo was executed not because he espoused heliocentricity but because he insulted the church in his writtings. His execution was a source of horror to most of the Catholic peers of the time, who increased funding to the institute he worked for in a kind of recompense.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
Galileo wasn't executed at all. He lived to the ripe old age of 78.
See http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/...thematicians/Galileo.html (The following excerpt is taken from the above site.)
Shortly after publication of Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Systems of the World - Ptolemaic and Copernican the Inquisition banned its sale and ordered Galileo to appear in Rome before them. Illness prevented him from travelling to Rome until 1633. Galileo's accusation at the trial which followed was that he had breached the conditions laid down by the Inquisition in 1616. However a different version of this decision was produced at the trial rather than the one Galileo had been given at the time. The truth of the Copernican theory was not an issue therefore; it was taken as a fact at the trial that this theory was false. This was logical, of course, since the judgement of 1616 had declared it totally false. Found guilty, Galileo was condemned to lifelong imprisonment, but the sentence was carried out somewhat sympathetically and it amounted to house arrest rather than a prison sentence. He was able to live first with the Archbishop of Siena, then later to return to his home in Arcetri, near Florence, but had to spend the rest of his life watched over by officers from the Inquisition. Cheers. ------------------"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." - Douglas N. Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
I stand corrected. I maintain however that it was not heliocentricity that resulted in Galileo's punishment.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4060 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
You are so confused you cannot even stay on the topic of the thread YOU started. To be fair, Mammuthus, I think Fred's point was to say that even if evolutionists no longer define abiogenesis as part of evolution, most evolutionists still believe that abiogenesis occurred through natural means. Therefore when Fred said, "as far as what Darwin believed, just because he did not offer a just-so story of abiogenesis does not mean it was not part of his overall paradigm of life arising via naturalistically processes," he was staying on topic. His topic is irrelevant, because no one is denying (as far as I know) that most evolutionists, even many who are theists, believe that abiogenesis occurred by natural means, but he's not off his topic. (There are a number of theists who have to admit evolution, because of the evidence, but are holding on to the belief that abiogenesis required a supernatural act of God.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4060 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
This was a bit of dubious revisionist history perpetrated in the 1800s, which is well-documented in the book Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus & Modern Historians by Jeffrey Burton Russell. Dr Danny Faulkner has a good online article about this here: I can find quotes from Christians of the 2nd century saying the earth is round, and I've heard plenty of evidence that the people of Columbus' day knew the earth was round (but thought, accurately, that India was too far to sail to), so you're right about this. However, the main point of the post you were replying to was that Christians believed, taught, and forcefully defended the view that the sun circles the earth. Now they've changed that view, but there's no explanation for how the sun could stand still in the sky. Perhaps you could address the main point of the post you were replying to.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4060 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
This is also misleading. Most of Galileo’s problems were due to resistance from the academic community. Only later did the Roman church become involved. Why is it evolutionists conveniently forget this fact? Dan's point was accurate. It wasn't the scientific community threatening Galileo to force him to recant. However, this dodges the whole argument. Are you really suggesting that Christians knew the earth revolved around the sun, but the academic community convinced them to drop that belief, adopt the belief that the sun circles the earth, and then get adamant enough about it to persecute Galileo? That's bizarre. Christians believed that the sun circled the earth. Due to scientists, the churches have agreed. This makes the "earth standing still in the sky" concept very difficult to swallow. The original point still stands. Care to address it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4060 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
I maintain however that it was not heliocentricity that resulted in Galileo's punishment. You can maintain it all you want, but there doesn't appear to be any evidence backing you. From The Galileo Project:
quote: I think you'll find most biographies share the same view. Perhaps what bothered the RCC was the way he expressed his views. Nonetheless, had the RCC agreed then that the earth revolved around the sun, as it now does, there would not have been an issue. The views were the issue. It's very hard to "properly" express a dissenting viewpoint when a religious entity is ruling the country.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6475 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
Hi TL,
I am not sure I entirely agree with you here. quote: Except in the first paragraph there is no evidence that evolutionists including Darwin ever did generally include abiogenesis in the definition of evolution. The reference to Darwin has no bearing on the threads title "The Evolution Definition Shell Game" since Darwin could have believed that life arose from a pink unicorns eye and it would still be irrelevant for thetheory of evolution...i.e. it has no bearing on the definition of evolution or the theory of evolution.
quote:I agree with you here completely but quote: I don't know if the numbers here would hold up. I think the majority would say god(s) or whatever started it and evolution then worked from there. I am not so sure theistic evolutionists necessarily subscribe to abiogenesis...especially because there is no theory of abiogenesis. Perhaps Percy could re-post the numbers for scientists who take a1. creationist view 2. theistic evolution view 3. are atheists since I think he has posted this before? quote: His topic is that evolution = abiogenesis and both are impossible and therefore goddidit...if you want more information about Fred and his ideas (and have a lot of patience for pure nonsense) go here 404 Not Found
and here 404 Not Found
cheers,M
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
My television told me so, it must be true!
I'm getting my information here from 'Gods in the Sky' a recent science and religous history series on British TV, it seemed accurate and authorative on the points I already knew about, so I consider it likely to be accurate on this point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Zhimbo Member (Idle past 6012 days) Posts: 571 From: New Hampshire, USA Joined: |
I hope this wasn't meant to be a serious reply...that fact that one possibly scholarly source says something in the face of overwhelming opposition from other scholarly sources means little. If your post was just a tongue-in-cheek concession, then never mind.
The Galileo story *is* subtler than often depicted, but there's no controversy that heliocentricity was central to his conflict with the Church.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
Mostly it was meant to be a 'I don't really know' reply. Not having done anything approaching a thorough investigation I am not in a position to judge between the source cited by Truthlover and 'Gods in the Sky'.
I find the idea that heliocentricity was central unlikely. Copernicus had suggested it without problem many years earlier, and the church continued to fund the institute and it's research into this area afterwards. Certainly the writing in which Galileo forwarded this idea did cause the problem, but that does not necessarily mean it was heliocentricity itself that was the problem.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
It is my understand, Mr Jack, that you are in a technical way, correct.
It was disobedience of an earlier order that resulted in his house arrest. However, this is a very technical legalistic point of view, Nit picking in fact. The issue was he was ordered not to teach heliocentrism as a fact but only as an idea. He was preceived, for good reason, to have disobeyed this order. Obviously, however convoluted the cases before the inquisition and the politics of the time. It was heliocentrism that was at the root of it all. To suggest otherwise is disengenuous.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
Copernicus managed to avoid "any problem" but the church felt it appropriate to burn Bruno for believing him.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
truthlover Member (Idle past 4060 days) Posts: 1548 From: Selmer, TN Joined: |
Copernicus had suggested it without problem many years earlier Um, that's because he didn't complain when they banned it as heresy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
posterdot Inactive Member |
The text of the condemnation reads: "We say, pronounce, sentence and declare that you, Galileo, by reason of these things which have been detailed in the trial and which you have confessed already, have rendered yourself according to this Holy Office vehemently suspect of heresy, namely of having held and believed a doctrine that is false and contrary to the divine and Holy Scripture: namely that Sun is the centre of the world and does not move from east to west, and that one may hold and defend as probable an opinion after it has been declared and defined contrary to Holy Scripture. Consequently, you have incurred all the censures and penalties enjoined and promulgated by the sacred Canons and all particular and general laws against such delinquents. We are willing to absolve you from them provided that first, with a sincere heart and unfeigned faith, in our presence you abjure, curse and detest the said errors and heresies, and every other error and heresy contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Church in the manner and form we will prescribe to you
http://galileo.imss.firenze.it/museo/a/esenten.html
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024