Jerry Kraus wrote:
> On Sep 16, 4:43 pm, doug
xx.com> wrote:
> >>Jerry Kraus wrote:
>>
>>>On Sep 16, 4:27 pm, doug
xx.com> wrote:>>
>>>>Jerry Kraus wrote:
>>
>>>>>On Sep 16, 3:18 pm, doug
xx.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>Jerry Kraus wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>On Sep 16, 2:23 pm, doug
xx.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>Jerry Kraus wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>On Sep 16, 1:54 pm, doug
xx.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>Jerry Kraus wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>On Sep 15, 5:14 pm, "tadams...@
yahoo.com"
yahoo.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sep 15, 3:07 pm, Jerry Kraus
yahoo.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sep 15, 12:54 pm, "tadams...@
yahoo.com"
yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sep 15, 11:46 am, Jerry Kraus
yahoo.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sep 14, 4:50 pm, "tadams...@
yahoo.com"
yahoo.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sep 14, 4:37 pm, Jerry Kraus
yahoo.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sep 13, 11:09 am, "Robert J. Kolker"
comcast.net> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Jerry Kraus wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sep 12, 4:06 pm, Rock Brentwood
yahoo.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sep 8, 3:20 pm, "Dan Drake"
dandrake.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The Church condemned Galileo because he was wrong. But what they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>neglected to mention is that they were wrong too.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If Galileo had not satirized the Church they would not have condemned
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>him. His arrogance, ultimately, was what got him into trouble.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Correct. Dissing Pope Urban was not a peachy keen career move for Mr. G.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mr. G. put all of Aristotle's howlers in the mouth of Simplicio who was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>a surrogate for Pope Urban.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Bob Kolker- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And, one could argue that all the Church was trying to do was to get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Galileo to do his job: provide clear proofs and an alternative,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>comprehensive theoretical formulation to Aristotle. They were hoping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Galileo would be the next Thomas Aquinas.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>HUH????
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Thomas Aquinas had to flee an investigation by the Bishop of Paris.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>He was excommunicated after his death.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Unlike Galileo, Aquinas was lucky to have lived out his life before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the Chuch created the office of Grand Inquisitor.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Learn something about the Catholic Church!- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ummm... Thomas Aquinas was canonized as a Saint fifty years after his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>death. Learn something about the Catholic Church!- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They excommunicated Aquinas and tried to bring him up on charges of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>heresy, but he fled. Just like with Galileo, they have never admitted
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that they were wrong about the charges and the excommunication.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The Catholic Church never admits that it is wrong.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>I think you can take the canonization as an admission of error. Just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>my opinion, of course.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I agree that the Pope and his Church is fallible.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Certainly. And so are scientists. Maybe the Church and Scientists
>>>>>>>>>>>should work together to correct each other's errors, rather than
>>>>>>>>>>>simply compete for power with each other. They way they tend to.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>Science is looking for truth and has been pointing out the church's
>>>>>>>>>>errors. They are not interested in correcting theirs. You notice
>>>>>>>>>>they still push creationism, etc. Scientists look for truth and the
>>>>>>>>>>church has no interest in it.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>As I've indicated previously Doug, you're a moron. If a scientist
>>>>>>>>>says "it's true", why, you know that means it must be true. If a
>>>>>>>>>theologian or philosopher says "it's true", why, you know that means
>>>>>>>>>it must be false.
>>
>>>>>>>>>And, I have no doubt that makes perfect sense to you.
>>
>>>>>>>>It is because science is based on looking for facts. Religion is
>>>>>>>>based on a book of folk tales.
>>
>>>>>>>>- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>And who, exactly, decides the difference between facts and folk-tales,
>>>>>>>Doug? And why?
>>
>>>>>>>And how, exactly, do we know that they aren't making this distinction
>>>>>>>on the basis of their own self-interest, rather than any real public
>>>>>>>interest? Scientists, Priests, everybody, why, they're all pretty
>>>>>>>selfish, aren't they?
>>
>>>>>>If you knew anything about science, you would understand. Experiments
>>>>>>get repeated to test for accuracy. Theories get checked and rechecked
>>>>>>for validity. This is very different to just reading a book of folk
>>>>>>tales and assuming it means something, particularly since different
>>>>>>groups use different books of folk tales.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>And who decides which experiments to do, and which experiments to
>>>>>believe, and what those experiments mean, and why, Doug?
>>
>>>>Your paranoia is pretty sad.
>>
>>>>And don't
>>
>>>>>you think self-interest is likely to play a role in these decisions,
>>>>>just like in everything else, Doug? And don't you think religious
>>>>>people do experiments Doug?
>>
>>>>No.
>>
>>>> And don't you know that the Vatican has
>>
>>>>>its own research laboratories staffed by people doing experiments, who
>>>>>use their understanding of human limitations based on religious
>>>>>training to help to form their judgements about the results of these
>>>>>experiments?
>>
>>>>Sure they do. Yeah right. Remember that religious training is not
>>>>compatible with science. The pope gets to declare what is true.
>>
>>>>>No, I suppose you don't.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>>Remember that Capitalism is not compatible with science. The rich get
>>>to declare what is true.
>>
>>No, good capitalism is dependent on science. Do you have any idea where
>>all the nice things you have and use, like the internet came from? They
>>did not come from religion. You are grasping and straws and
>>still missing.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>- Show quoted text -
>
>
> No, Doug. The entire modern scientific method, the concept of
> experimentation, the concept of a scientific theory all come from
> deeply religious people life Thomas Aquinas and Isaac Newton.
There is a big difference betwen coming from religious people and
coming from religion.
As far
> as that goes, Galileo was religious. He just was arrogant, and
> thought he understood things that he did not understand.
He was also persecuted by the church who were not looking for science.
>
> The problem with modern science is that scientists think they are Gods
> and do not understand their own limitations. They should study
> religion and philosophy, so that they do understand them. And, then,
> they could make much better progress in necessary areas such as
> controlled nuclear fusion, rather than simply creating multi-billion
> dollar make-work projects for their own benefit, that accomplish
> nothing.
>
You know nothing of science and live only in your fantasy world. It
does not seem to be a happy place.
>
>
