On Sep 16, 5:28Â pm, doug
xx.com> wrote:> 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. Â 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: Â provide clear proofs and an alternative,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>comprehensive theoretical formulation to Aristotle. Â 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. Â 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. Â 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. Â 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. Â And so are scientists. Â Maybe the Church and Scientists
>>>>>>>>>>>>should work together to correct each other's errors, rather than
>>>>>>>>>>>>simply compete for power with each other. Â They way they tend to.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>Science is looking for truth and has been pointing out the church's
>>>>>>>>>>>errors. Â They are not interested in correcting theirs. You notice
>>>>>>>>>>>they still push creationism, etc. Â 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. Â If a scientist
>>>>>>>>>>says "it's true", why, you know that means it must be true. Â 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. Â 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? Â 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? Â 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. Â Theories get checked and rechecked
>>>>>>>for validity. Â 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? Â
>
>>>>>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? Â 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. Â Remember that religious training is not
>>>>>compatible with science. Â 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. Â 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. Â You are grasping and straws and
>>>still missing.- Hide quoted text -
>
>>>- Show quoted text -
>
>> No, Doug. Â 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.
>
> Â As far
>
>> as that goes, Galileo was religious. Â 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. Â They should study
>> religion and philosophy, so that they do understand them. Â 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.
>
>
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well, like they say Doug: "Ignorance is Bliss". This obviously
applies, in your case.
