Cardinal Peter Turkson explains the Catholic Church's dedication to & patronage of the sciences(8/8)

[@Zayn___varane]

Alex O'Connor asked "What then subsequently happened to Galileo?" The speaker did not answer the question. The answer is that, Galileo was placed under house arrest by the Roman Catholic Church in the early 17th century because of his support for the heliocentric model of the solar system, which posited that the Earth orbited the sun-a view that contradicted the geocentric model endorsed by the Church. In 1616, the Roman Catholic Church issued a decree stating that heliocentrism was formally heretical, as it seemed to contradict certain biblical passages. Galileo continued to advocate for the heliocentric model, and in 1632, he published his book "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems," which defended the Copernican heliocentric model. Galileo's support for heliocentrism led to his trial by the Roman Catholic Inquisition in 1633. He was found guilty of heresy, forced to recant his views, and sentenced to house arrest for the remainder of his life. This is basic History...

[@Verticalamiteit]

This is true, but please recall that Galileo was invited by the pope himself to write that book, specifically in order to summarize the arguments of both the heliocentric model (as proposed by Keppler) and the - until then universally accepted - geocentric model (Aristotle, Ptolemy). Galileo wrote a dialogue in which three characters, including one named Simplicio (Simpleton, haha), have a discussion of these arguments. Siplicio represents the Ptolemaic model. The simpleton character then posits the pope's favorite argument: that perhaps everything is yet much more complicated than we seem to think we understand. This was not a smart move, and is in fact in line with Galileo's tendency to think everyone but himself an idiot, including even the pope that invited him to write this book. Of course, we now know he was right, but that was not clear at all at the time, and he was not very diplomatic in using this invitation from the Church to clarify his arguments. The fact that the church invited him still, shows clearly that the church was in fact a sponsor of science in many occasions (this often depended on how scientifically minded the pope at the time was). Should he have been put under house arrest? (which was rather more like village-arrest), perhaps not. But the story of Galileo is not a good argument for the Church as an enemy of science, there much better cases to make that point. Personally I think the history of the Church betrays a deep interest in science and consensus since its beginning. After all, this is about knowledge for eternity. Anyway, I highly recommend everyone to read "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems", it is a brilliant and hilarious book, even today.

[@WayneLynch69]

WTF Biblical passages?! They would've known, so they certainly would've invoked them. Many, many spiritisms/beliefs/"religions" worship "gaia" et al...NOT Judeo Christianity. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING of their religion enshrines the earth or universe as divine/unquestioned. Bubonic plague was spread by fleas from rats...a few cats would've helped. But superstitions eschewed cats. The fulcrum chairs used to "weigh" witches are on display today in Europe... "Samuel" invoked a witch/seer, somehow for 2,900 years and "the Church" considered them a non-extant superstition. UNTIL Holland took up their murders to address "the Little Ice-Age" horrors. In the U.S. witches were tried by Harvard trained judges...NOT the Vatican---EVER! The Vatican utilized what "science" was available to them to stamp down very harmful and prolific "SUPERSTITIONS". "this is basic history" The following is from the greatest scientist to ever live, identifying this universe as the only one compatible with the Abrahamic God..OUT OF INFINITE UNIVERSES! GREAT GUESS MOSES!!! history.aip.org/exhibits/einstein/essay-einsteins-third-paradise.htm

[@miguelmartins5707]

That's the basic History for you, who learnt it biasedly, in a world that rejected the idea of God and holds on to the idea of Galileo as a martyr of science, when he was just an arrogant and jocular being, as @Victor tells us on his answer.

[@Eudaimonia88]

POI: Alex O'Connor is on Team Galileo. Team Vatican doesn't even notice.

[@timothymontes2049]

Darwin stopped liking movies? Films were not invented yet during his lifetime...

[@crabguy34]

thank you for sharing your thoughts

[@natmeyy7590]

Didn't offer a compelling argument, The few scientists he quoted Darwin etc had to claim to be Christian to be able to study in the first place ,you had to be Christian to study at University. The whole argument supporting religion is ridiculous to be Frank, don't know why we entertain it .

[@leroyonuoha]

The arrogance that the non-religious minority holds is quite entertaining. To be so steadfast in belief that is ostensibly not provable is laughable.

[@natmeyy7590]

@leroyonuoha I think you mean the complete opposite, the arogence that religious cults is unbelievable ,just as their belief is unbelievable .Based on nothing but nonsense, unverified accounts ,parables and legend that has caused nothing but harm in the world, double standards, hatred and abuse. Remember great claims demand great evidence. You don't provide any .

[@joshuataylor3550]

​@@leroyonuohathat applies to the religious even more so.

[@leroyonuoha]

@@joshuataylor3550 yeah, that makes the arrogance even more ironic

[@razoredge6130]

The fact that Christians did study science??

[@timothymontes2049]

More people now have relationship with their dogs than with God...

[@balsarmy]

Religion is very close to psychology and philosophy. If some people need religion why not? I think those rich kids don't know what suffering is

[@Marz2727]

That doesn't make god any less of a delusion

[@dailyDorc]

​@@Marz2727God is a less delusional claim than the idea that all matter and energy exploded out nothing. A scientific claim that refutes the most basic laws that science has to offer

[@Marz2727]

@@dailyDorc When did science prove that nothingness exists?

[@dailyDorc]

@@Marz2727 idk dude there are a lot of "scientific" claims that are asserted w no evidence

[@Marz2727]

@@dailyDorc I'm asking specifically about nothingness though. When did science prove that nothingness exists?

[@gedomazo5436]

They did not call a single Muslim speaker. How is the second biggest religion of the world, the one most well known for its belief in God held from such a debate. This is a bad choice of panel members on part of the house. `

[@MiseryRex]

Eh, would their arguments be any different? The real problem is that Islamic apologists tend to be very, very bad. They are more embarrassing than enlightening.

[@dailyDorc]

Idk if the Muslim religion is most well known for its belief in God. Think most people know it primarily for how it became the world's second biggest religion

[@And_Solskaer_Has_Won_It]

Because they wouldn't be able to misdirect or disagree with the premise of the question, and answer a different one instead, like they do to less intelligent audiences/fellow debaters. Can you imagine Muhammad Hijab actually trying to answer the question he was asked!

[@Killerbeedhh]

As far as I know Francis Darwin was the son of Charles Darwin

[@strech5412]

Giordano Bruno. Galileo Galilei. Alan Turing. Not “support” at all.

[@PRASANTHTHOMAS-hx3nh]

Yeah, let's forget all the scientists Supported by this one organisation(including the founding of the Universities where both of them studied, and Funding their research projects) because it messed up on twice on Galileo and Bruno(and Bruno wasn't even persecuted for his scientific beliefs but his beliefs about Jesus' Divinity and God) And Alan Turing was never a Catholic(he went from Anglican to Spiritual) and lived in a Non-Catholic country and was never persecuted for any Science he did but for homosexual

[@Stevexnycautomotive]

A look at the black man you will notice there is no other living thing on the face of the earth with that hair. So who really is God?. The one of a kind or the popular straight hair man?.

[@mattalley4330]

One of the more…interesting arguments I have heard. Could you clarify a bit?

[@joshuataylor3550]

​@@mattalley4330I think he's saying man created in God's image, but men look different, race in a very obvious way.

[@er423]

Cardinal Peter, why are you hiding the cross in your jacked if you are a Christian. Should you not be proud of it?

[@dailyDorc]

Probably to keep it from swinging into the podium or mic. Maybe he prefers to keep it in his jacket pocket close to his heart The man is in a collar, speaking about The Church, carries the title Bishop... Pretty sure he's not hiding anything.

[@Thindorama]

​@@dailyDorcNot just bishop, but cardinal.