| 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/hti.osu.edu/files/documents_in_the_... "the above-mentioned Galileo, because of the things deduced in the trial and confessed by you as above, have rendered yourself according to this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely of having held and believed a doctrine which is false and contrary to the divine and Holy Scripture: that the sun is the center of the world and does not move from east to west, and the earth moves and is not the center of the world, and that one may hold and defend as probable an opinion after it has been declared and defined contrary to Holy Scripture." And in Galileo's Abjuration: http://www.creatinghistory.com/galileo-galileis-abjuration-2... "after having been judicially instructed with injunction by the Holy Office to abandon completely the false opinion that the sun is the center of the world and does not move and the earth is not the center of the world and moves, and not to hold defend, or teach this false doctrine in any way whatever, orally or in writing; and after having been notified that this doctrine is contrary to Holy Scripture; I wrote and published a book in which I treat of this already condemned doctrine and adduce very effective reasons in its favor, without refuting them in any way." The premise of the whole "4 hour" series by that author is also wrong, approximately, that because the parallax of the stars wasn't observed until around 1750 Galileo "couldn't prove" in 1633 that the Earth is not standing still, therefore the Church was "right" and it wasn't a matter of faith but "a personal thing." It's obviously a completely invalid argument. Because the reason why Galileo was convinced about the wrongness of the heliocentric theory was the simple fact that he was really the first human in the world who saw the moons around other planet, not accidentally called "Galilean moons": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galilean_moons He didn't have to "prove." He was really sentenced only for "having held and believed a doctrine which is false and contrary to the divine and Holy Scripture." It's explicitly stated in the official document. That something like that is a reason enough for a condemnation by the religious authorities, even in much more recent times, can be obvious to anybody who tried to read the source text of the condemnation to murder of the author "along with all the editors and publishers aware of its content" of the book "The Satanic Verses" in 1989. I won't link to that, intentionally, but there's enough details to... check the original sources! Additionally, not only Galileo's but the Copernicus' book too remained banned by the Church for the next 200 years after Galileo was sentenced, in spite of all the scientific discoveries in these 200 years that made these texts less unique. And the discoveries... there were many of them. Starting with the publication of Newton's "Principia" in 1687, only 50 years after the sentence. Newton was, of course, out of the reach of the Catholic Church, thanks to the lucky coincidence of him being born in "a political system found on the family values of Henry VIII." It's always more worth checking the original sources instead of believing in 4 hours of text of somebody who intentionally avoids quoting and discussing these very sources. A lot of false claims can be constructed by omitting the evidence, the original sources and inventing the interpretations of the actual events. It's a very dishonest approach and should not be supported. |