"Pop Fly" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3a227e80-7b92-4583-ad7e-442c043c31f5@z11g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 3, 3:25 am, "Androcles" wrote:

I acknowledge the difference. I still believe the cardinals should
have bowed to the evidence.
=============================================

Criminals should confess and put themselves in jail instead of holding
up convenience stores. Good luck on that "should". When you train a
4-year-old to be a gymnast for 10 years you get a 14-year-old contestant
for the Olympic games. When you train a 3-year-old to be a violinist
for 17 years you get a 20-year-old highly accomplished musician.
What you don't get is a violin-playing Olympian.

The Moon goes around the Earth, doesn't it? So why not the Sun too?
Seems to me that the cardinals had a pretty good case. Then along
comes Galileo, who agrees with Copernicus, and tells a fifty- or
sixty-year-old that what he's believed all is life is wrong and wonders
why they kick him in the goolies.
Copernicus was wrong anyway, the planets move in elliptical orbits,
not circles, as Johannes Kepler showed.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Orbit/Orbit.xls

Odd man out was Tycho Brahe, he reckoned the planets went around
the Sun but the Sun went around the Earth.
=============================================

Science needs men like Copernicus who can
pull raw data together to create theories (useful information), but it
needs raw data much, much more. It's all about observing and believing
what the real world shows. Otherwise we would still believe, like
Aristotle, that there are only 4 elements; and that the world was
created 6000 years ago. In both these cases, the truth is much more
complex and exciting, and only revealed by the details.

=============================================

Interesting. But I must admit there's not enough evidence here to make
me doubt what so many have believed for so long while they tested it
with so much evidence, even though I'm not conversant enough with the
details to explain why their theory is better than yours.
===========================================

Science needs men like Androcles who can
pull raw data together to create theories (useful information), but it
needs raw data much, much more. It's all about observing and believing
what the real world shows. Otherwise we would still believe, like cardinal
Pop Fly, that there are thousands of binary stars, even though he's not
conversant enough with the details to explain why his theory is better
than mine.
In both these cases, the truth is much more complex and exciting, and
only revealed by the details.
I still believe cardinal Pop Fly should have bowed to the evidence,
since I happen to agree with what he said. Pity he doesn't follow his
own "should".
Cardinals don't understand the evidence and don't want to understand
the evidence. To me, *you* are a cardinal, Pop Fly, branded by your
own words.
"Interesting", but you are not about to follow it up. You are just another
cardinal with 20-20 hindsight and blind foresight. You don't have what
it takes. Science doesn't need men like Pop Fly.
Over and out.