Galileo-Church Controversy

While I certainly don’t agree with them (the church), it’s not quite as evil as I had previously thought.First, he was kept in a palace, and he was permitted to continue publishing until his death. Second, according to the article he had made a lot of enemies in ways that other scientists of the day, who also held heliocentric beliefs, hadn’t done. Lastly, he was pushing science that there wasn’t evidence for and that required new assumptions to make up for the current assumptions they were t

>A shitstorm ensued, the Church got shutdown-offended, and Galileo spent the rest of his life under house arrest. We’re so offended, we can’t even disagree, we shut shit down.This is really bad history in a very relevant way to the topic. The Church wasn't really offended, they disagreed. The church in that case included most scientists at the time. This was because Galileo's theory didn't actually check out at all when he made the argument as it couldn't explain the ob

The Wikipedia article [0] has a detailed discussion of the political elements as well as valid scientific criticisms of his work.Ironically, what you are arguing is much like the chief scientific error Galileo made: offering a sufficient condition for an occurrence does not prove that this condition caused the event. Him being tried and convicted of heresy doesn’t mean that his trial wasn’t politically motivated. Despots make up charges for political enemies constantly throughout history and

And this "4 hours" will be wasted. The author of that text intentionally misleads his readers.The author claims:"the reaction at the time was "WTF? Which heresy are you talking about here?"But the exact heresy was explicitly and very clearly stated both in the sentence by the Inquisition:http://hti.osu.edu/sites

The Church did hold the consensus opinion, and accepted the minority opinion, Copernicanism, as a hypothesis. At that time, the epicycic systems made better predictions than Heliocentrism with round orbits. Kepler's later elliptical models did fit and won out after Galileo's day. Also, while Galileo presented some compelling evidence from astronomical observations, he was the only one able to make them, which made his claims difficult to confirm. He stated that Copernicanism was not a

Galileo's story is a bit exaggerated in the popular zeitgeist. Promoting heliocentrism vs geocentrism as a scientific theory may have annoyed the church, but he was ultimately granted permission to publish his findings. It was the satirical, strawman representation of the geocentrist (and, by extension, the Pope) as a complete idiot in his published dialogue that got him imprisoned.

Well the Vatican did, to Galileo Galilei. Eventualy, took a while :Phttps://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13618460-600-vatican-...

More from a historical Galileo standpoint of science vs religion.

"The Great Ptolemaic Smackdown" is a pure lie. A long text, but still a lie.The author claims:"the reaction at the time was "WTF? Which heresy are you talking about here?"But the exact heresy was explicitly and very clearly stated both in the sentence by the Inquisition:https://hti.osu.edu/sites/hti.osu.

I came to post this. There is another important detail: Galileo did not contradict scripture (religion), rather he contradicted Aristotle (science). The Catholic church was actually rather interested in science at the time, and were far from the anti-intellectuals that the common narrative makes them seem.