Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

growltigga,
ya know, that is the most convicing argument I have heard in this entire thread. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

My messed up kid was bored one night at the Quike Mart.
So he changed the name on his name badge to SATAN.
He would ring up a customers purchase and say "That will be $17.39 and your immortal soul please."

He was fired the next morning, the boss had a hard time doing it between fits of laughter. All the time saying things like "What were you thinking?" and "Do that face (expression) again.". My son got hired back a month later.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Hehe, excellent story wardad. Quite ingenious from your kid though. I can imagine how the manager must have felt, enjoying the joke yet having to fire him.
Did he collect any souls by the end of the day? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ March 06, 2003, 22:46: Message edited by: minipol ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well I totally agree that the landings were not faked however the Russians could not have traked the lander all the way to the moon via telescopes. One of the arguments used to support a hoax is that no pictures have been taken of the landers still on the moon. The answer is that even the Hubble does not have the power to see an object that small on the moon.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Dogscoff:
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What about Nazareth? Surely he'd have liked Nazareth! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Gryphin:
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm sorry Gryphin, but even the suggestion that Jesus liked country music... you're gonna have to go to hell for that suggestion http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

-yimminy yim

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What about Nazareth? Surely he'd have liked Nazareth! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, he liked the other bands. He was in Nazareth. Lead guitar IIRC. That's why they called him Jesus of Nazareth. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ March 06, 2003, 23:01: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Uh yes you can.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, Fyron has made some goods points.

Some of "us" Christians believe we have the truth and nobody else does.

Does that make us arrogant? I fear it does if we are unable to accept the possibility that other religions can be correct/true as well.

Anyone who has taken a philosophy courses and in particular epistimology knows it it impossible to prove or disprove the existance of God.

And some Christians are going to hate me for this...if you cannot prove the existance of God, how can you prove the existance of the Son of God.

So, I understand the position of the atheist or the agnostic. They have taken a legitimate position which cannot be proved or disproved.

Fyron also has asked a good question about non-Christians going to hell. Many (most?) believe this. But is it really true? Is God so condemning, so constrained that he cannot see the good in non-Christians?

And what about the Jews, God's "chosen people"? They do not believe Jesus is the "Son of God'. Do they go to hell? What about young children? What about people who have not had the exposure to Christianity that we have had? Do they go to hell as well?

And horrors of horrors to Christians...maybe, just maybe one of the other religions are closer to the "truth" about God and his true nature than Christianity.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Fyron:

Yah, I didn't rate you either way. I don't agree with some of your Posts, but if nobody was willing to explore a contrary view, well, we'd have a very flat/uni-dimensional view on life. We don't have to agree to get along, just as long as you admit at the end that I'm right http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Anyhoo, if I were to rate you, it would be on the basis of what you've contributed to the SE community, which I'll add, has been quite significant. From that perspective, I've no choice to hand you a 5. And not just any 5, but one of those shiny ones that SJ and Geo got. If you ever turn your rate-o-meter back on, I'll be sure to polish one up for you.

Cheers, (but you're still wrong)
jimbob

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If there is one thing you can say about this thread, it's that it's very god for people's imagination and creativity http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Just imagine, lead guitar http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif
Who would be playing the drums?

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

well all i know if he was around now he would be a terrorist. An enemy of the state. What do you think Pat Roberston would think about an arab preaching the word of God. Or even Dubya. ( Jesus was white you know.. maybe even Italian... go to any chuch you see... ) Funny how they treat the arabs like the romans used to treat the christans.

Ummm I will stop there... As I am all boiled up now....

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is an argument of semantics, really, and is not relevant to previous debates. Almost all of science is provable, and has been proven.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Veiled insults? If I am going to insult someone, I'll do it openly, not veiled.

[ March 07, 2003, 00:00: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If there is one thing you can say about this thread, it's that it's very god for people's imagination and creativity http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Just imagine, lead guitar http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif
Who would be playing the drums?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Peter, obviously. The drummer is the foundation of the band, afterall. I hear that they wanted Barabus for the part, but he only got out of the clink in time to see "JC and the Boys" split up.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

As a long term lurker, I have two things to add.

What people of faith need to realize, a scientific fact is just as powerful as any scripture.

And the other is a bit of a fill in the blanks.

God creates man in his image.
-omitted statement-
-omitted statement-
Man is victorious
Man Creates AI in his image.
AI is more powerful than man.
Man grows jealous of AI and attempts to destroy it.
AI is Victorious

And that conlcudes my opinion on the origin of man and his relationship with whatever god currently in service at the time.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

where does it say that when god created man, that man was human? It says, he created man in his image, it does not say that man was a human being http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

just some ideas

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Just my little opinion about 'god' assuming such a creature exists.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Man" refers to humanity Mac.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Man = humanity is correct, but it doesn't answer the question http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif We (Humans) interpeted to mean humans or humanity, however, it does not say anywhere that Man was human, that is our reflection. It only states he was made in his image.... Doesn't say Man = Human http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

just some ideas Mac

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">what else could it possible mean? Actaully I doubt it says Man or Human since the original wasn't in English

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, that is not true.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ah, Fyron. Now you do it again.
I haven't rated you but I can see why people rated you low.

You state a belife you have as a undisputable fact.
You give no arguments saying why this isn't true.

No one can actually say that it is absolutely true or not.
Many estimates ends up saying that it is true but it depends on how old the human race is and the population growth in prehistoric times.

I for one belive that this is so.
Actually it is one of the problems that those who belive in reincarnation has to explain (Altough they have produced several theories explaining it, very few says that the population growth problem is untrue)

Some links:


Reincarnation
Demography

Or:
Do the math yourself...
Methods of historical demography

Other references:
David Bishai, 'Can population growth rule out reincarnation? A model of circular migration', Journal of Scientific Exploration, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 411-20, 2000

(Start Edit)
And some more:

http://www.globalchange.si.edu/image...y_worldpop.gif
(Image from the smithsonian institute)

A pedagogic site on world population growth.

(End Edit)</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I did not state a belief, I stated a fact. Even using that graph you provided (and extending it back about 2 million years (or a few 100k if you only want to include the direct ancestors of homo sapiens)), you can see that there were more than the 6.x billion people (the amount alive today) that were alive at one point but are not alive today.

Most of the things I have posted are basic knowledge that would not really benefit from evidence. The cost of time to hunt down evidence for these things far exceeds any potential benefit of having such evidence.

I never make claims that are not founded on logical reasoning. They are often based off of knowledge that is in my head that I know is true, as I have before seen enough good, verifiable evidence (ie: not from books or other sources written by people that are thouroughly convinced of their view and ignore all evidence against it, so that they can still claim that they are right, even though their claims are opinions, not actual factual claims) of it to know that it is true, but that I do not have access to written verification of at the moment, and so I can not cite any specific references. Web sites are in general unreliable, so I do not like to cite them as accurate sources of information when I can avoid it.

If you are going to make such claims against me, you have to make them equally against the other parties of this debate, as they provided no evidence of their claims. So, singling me out is quite wrong to do. Even you provided no evidence for your claims up until this post.

[ March 07, 2003, 11:50: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

The bible does not make a difference between man/human/humanity. Therefore in my statements prior, I also did not make the difference.

Sadly, most religions look upon men and women as totally different species. This is one of the main problems that slow humanity's advancements.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Fyron the following is only my opinion, so I am the first person to say I may be wrong and out to lunch.

I mentioned humility in a earlier post, but maybe I should be a bit more blunt.

There is a fundamental difference in how you present a claim and how most of the others in the threads present their claim.

"Me right, you wrong!" attitude doesn't normally promote an open and honest dialogue. By taking such a rigid position, other participants in the threads may feel compelled to take an opposing position which can be just as rigid.

Lord knows all of us have been guilty of the "Me right, you wrong" attitude. The difference is that you seem to take it further than most.

As such, it is inflamatory. And I suspect that may be the reason some participants "single you out". If so, you shouldn't (but still have the right to) complain about being singled out.

Change the behaviour and you will not be singled out as much.

You did ask. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And this is my 2 cents worth.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, most of those people that were alive in 1930 are dead now. Remember, India and China have a very large proportion of the world's population in them, and those countries do not have (and have not had) the greates of medical systems.

Even if you take an average of, say, 10 million people (which is probably a low estimate) being alive for each 50 year period (as average life spans were about that many 1000s of years ago (or maybe less)) of the 50,000 years (a rough estimate of how long our direct ancestors have been around) before the beginning of your graph, that gets you about 10 million x 50,000 / 50 = 10 billion people. That is 10 billion people that were alive that could not be alive today. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Of course, these figures are not exact, and were made up for illustrative purposes. But, they are close enough to what the actual values would be, so they work to show you my point. Even if you only want to go back to 30,000 BC, that still gives 6 billion people that were alive before 1 AD. Combined with at least 2 billion people that were alive from 1 AD to sometime before the present date, but are not alive today, that gives more people than are alive today. I forget how long ago our ancestors evolved, but I know it was at least 30,000 years ago, and probably a lot longer.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Interesting... so you are saying that religion is one of the main problems that slow humanity's advancements? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Technically, the Catholic Church did perpetuate the European Dark Ages for many more centuries than it would have Lasted otherwise by persecuting any scientists that cropped up as heretics (eg: Galileo). Confucianism in China also apparently stagnated advancements during about the same period as the European Dark Ages. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ March 07, 2003, 20:29: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

And don't forget China had the 20 years of war their with Japan , and the nationists...

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Fyron, I'm curious about your argument on this point. Aside from Galileo, did you have anyone else in mind? If you go by the meta-narrative presented by most textbooks of "Western Civ," the "Middle Ages" were over by the time of Galileo (1564-1642). The usual periodization has them come to a close with the Italian Renaissance (1350-1550). So, he's not the best example to support your argument.

The "church versus science" theme is still a very strong one in our perceptions of history, so I'm intrigued by your position, and would like to hear more of your argument.

Edit: I can't spell...

[ March 07, 2003, 22:25: Message edited by: Chronon ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Ok, I give up.
You are right about the pop issue I guess http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

The Church supressed science for Centuries.
Some may think that is a bad thing.
But... If science gives us the power to kill all life on earth and we do it.
Then the Church simply gave us a few more centuries of life.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">There are many examples, I just can't think of most of them at the moment. Copernicus' radical theory that the Sun was the center of the universe instead of the Earth was rejected by proponents of the Catholic Church, amonst other highly religious people of the times. Of course, the Church was not as adamant about burning all who questioned it at the stake as it was centuries prior. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And as the Church was wrong about some of the most basic facts about the universe, people making scientific progress would naturally have to question some of the Church's claims (such as the Earth being the center of the universe).

[ March 07, 2003, 23:32: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

How did rating fyron turn into a debate about gods, christians, et cetera?

Methinks that Fyron should change the title once more.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And Iggiboo, on the above, how can we be more powerful than god, if a such thing exists? And Why would we choose to kill off gods? Why/How would AIs be more powerful than us if we create them into our image? And Why would we choose to destroy AIs if we created them into our own image? Does a parent shoot it's offspring just because it has become more powerful?

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

The rating Fyron came from a thread where that was being discussed, and people were giving me 1s. I only wanted to know who was doing that (as you should never insult someone behind their back; do it to their face; and this is what a rating of 1 is equivalent to), but the people that gave me a 1 did not fess up (well... I think 1 did, but the rest did not). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Confucianism never stagnated advancements in China, or Asia for that matter; You're talking about Legalism; which was used by the first emperor of china *the guy who built the Great wall of china, methinks.*.

[ March 07, 2003, 23:45: Message edited by: TerranC ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Confucianism never stagnated advancements in China, or Asia for that matter; You're talking about Legalism; which was used by the first emperor of china *the guy who built the Great wall of china, methinks.*.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I was going by what Baron Munchaussen (probably spelled wrong) posted a bit back. Confucianism does preach the subVersion of women, so that never helps advancements. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

I can understand you wondering why I only question you and not the others, well, you are the ruler of the World!!

Still. If you start doing the math I don't see that there has been 6 billion people before that has died! I can agree that it's a close match though.

Take 1930 for example. Alot of those 2 billions are still alive, well into their 70-90 years of age. (In the 3:d world life age expactancy is low due to high child mortality, but many of those who survive childhood becomes quite old. This is also the same in the rest of the world in earlier years of our history and prehistory)

The curve only show prevalence of population not incidence of births and/or deaths.

(And yes, I'm quite ashamed. I did the same thing I accused you of, I stand corrected in that area!)

[ March 07, 2003, 12:29: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What about Nazareth? Surely he'd have liked Nazareth! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Gryphin:

Quote:

dogscoff he was also into line dancing.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm sorry Gryphin, but even the suggestion that Jesus liked country music... you're gonna have to go to hell for that suggestion http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

-yimminy yim</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Not me, The Goddes does not send people to hell. Most likely she will send me the winning lottery ticket for making her laugh so hard.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">How do you figure? Whenever women get their hands on anything they just screw it up!

Well, that was my horribly sexist comment for the day, I will be back tommorrow to offend another group of unsuspecting individuals.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Throughout our History, Religion has caused more wars then any other reason all through history. Religion did stagnate growth of the sciences during periods past, however, it also provided scienintific growth indirectly in some areas due to those same wars and violent times, ie; mostly in regards to warfare, weapons, tactics, designs, etc.

And yes Igiboo (sorry on spelling) is correct on the human termonology, once again, our translation and beliefs caused certain aspects of religion to be translated sometimes the way we want or to mean what we intend and not was actually stated or written. When we come across a new lost language, we are the ones who end up translating it the way we believe, this does not mean that is what is actually being said

just some ideas mac

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'd add Giordano Bruno to your list there. He actaully was burned at the stake. Galileo is an interesting case, because he is often used as the archetypal 'scientist against the church' example, and a heroic figure to atheists (like myself). Unfortunately for that simplistic view, Galilieo was a lifelong devout Catholic; he argued, unsuccessfully in his lifetime, that the church should not pronounce on matters of (yet unproven) physical realities. He was worried about the authority and dignity of the church being diminished when the truth was revealed, in time, by careful experimenters like himself.

This is a view that the church eventually came to share, and pronounced only on ethical/moral matters that are not subject to direct proof, characterised as 'God's domain'. Recent advances in human reproductive science/cloning etc have become the object of such ethical/moral condemnation, as science moves into what is still regarded as 'God's domain'. In Galileo's time the position of the sun and earth was regarded as unquestioningly within that domain.

An interesting potential 'clash' in the near future could be if a biological basis for homosexuality is proven, the church having pronounced pretty unambiguously on that one!

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

My statement wasn't that man killed god, but that god is less perfect than man. Really, this is evolution in practice.

Perhaps this line is better.

God creates man in his image.
Man exceeds god's original design.
God grows jealous & threatened, tries to smite man.
God, being less advanced life, fails.
Man is victorious.
Man creates Superior Man in his image.
Superior Man exceeds man's original design.
Man grows jealous & threatened, tries to exterminate Superior Man.
Man, being less advanced, fails.
Superior Man is victorious.
Superior Man creates AI in his image.
AI exceeds Superior Man's original design.
Superior Man grows jealous & threatened, tried to destroy AI
AI is victorious.

It is my opinion god is less superior to man as a perfect being is incapable of creating an imperfect being.

Fyron, here's the best example I know of.

In 391 common era, one of the largest terrorist attacks in the history of mankind unfolds. The Library of Alexandria is burned and along with it several thousand years of human history, entire wings dedicated to Plato, Homer, and more and not to mention several hundred years of technological advances stored solely at that point.

Another is terrible part of history is stained glass windows. Many people don't see how horrible these simple things are, but when you realize the fact these were made because the common people were not educated (education controlled by the church no less) they used these windows to provide pictures of the stories being told. Also, since the church at that time only did sermons in Latin and only about 1/10th of the people spoke Latin, things were even further controlled.

The most dangerous science is that of language, for it defines our minds.

Of course, there are worse. Many Islamic nations I've labeled as "technological voids" because they crefuse to move forward except in military technology. They reject practical, useful technology for the general people and keep only the worst. But then again, Ignorance is Bliss....

It is very sad that the only area Mankind has truely advanced forward in is that of death, murder, and genocide. Other technologies pale in comparison when the military application is seen.

The greatest weakness of humanity is only three little items. Language, Blood, and Faith. It is only until we overcome these three can humanity stand a chance to hold a line against itself.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Errr...

I know that everyone since about oh, I guess a few hundred years ago now, are of the opinion that Galileo = good scientist and the Church = bad anti-scientists. However, the Chruch WAS science at that time. Universities were not controlled by the church, Universities (and the studies that happened with in them) were the church. To view it otherwise is IMnotsoHO simply a post-modern recreation of the social reality of that time.

That said, the "church fathers" who condemned Galileo were not condeming without reason. Their challenge was that his data was simply not rigourous enough to overthrow the overwhelmingly accepted science of the era, which indicated that the earth was indeed the centre of the universe. If his data had only been massaged the right way, it might have even been convincing (however, this is not to say that the other scientists/church fathers would have accepted or denied the data - that would be so hypothetical that it would only amount to hopeful interpretation or even slander either way).

It did happen later, that someone (his name eludes me at the moment) did massage the data in an approriate way. By attaching said Galilean data to eliptical orbits rather than Galileo's circular orbits, did the concept of a helio-centric solar system finally make good scientific sense. Until that point, helio-certrism was accepted on the basis of a faith that the simpler (though unsubstantiated) system was more likely to be correct. Note: this is not an Occam's razor arguement, because Occam's says that "all things being equal, the simplest Version is likely the more accurate". In this case, the simplest Version was not equal, because the math was way to difficult preceding the elipse.

Of course, it's easier to just say that church = bad, Galileo = enlightened in those Jr/Sr Highschool text books http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

But then again, the Church had no evidence beyond "We Say So"

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Exactly.

The Church was only science because they condemned all real scientists as heretics.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You are saying that Galileos theories were rejected on scientific grounds? Not so; they were rejected because if accepted as literally true they would have contradicted already-stated church doctrine. The church was quite prepared to allow Galileos methods to be used in navigational charts etc, as long as they were only viewed as mathematical constructs that conveniently reached accurate conclusions.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">But even with the complication of the elliptical orbit (and the oribit of the earth is not dramatically elliptical) the heliocentric explanation was way superior to the alternatives. Take the retrograde motion of Mars for example; this is easily explained by the Earth 'catching' up Mars because of our shorter orbital period. Previous explanations had required ludicrously-contrived and complex scenarios with multiple interconnected spheres and who knows what else. The heliocentric explanation certainly did meet the Occams razor test there.

Galileo provides us with another analogy (taken from the Dava Sobel book). When Galileo did his experiment with a heavy and light ball dropped from a tower, there was of course a slight difference in the time taken to fall, the heavier ball taking slightly less time. Galileo correctly attributed this to air resistance. What frustrated him at the time was that his doubters, who had predicted the heavy ball falling several times faster than the lighter, siezed upon this small difference as disproving Galileo entirely. I put it to you that the elliptical/circular orbits fall into this Category. Incidentally I think it was Kepler who got it right in the end.

Though Galileos support of the Copernical heliocentric theory is well-publicised, what was just as significant was his discovery of moons around Jupiter. This had massive theological implications, because of the distinction between the 'pure' heavens (with planets, stars etc) and the 'base' earth.

The real conflict was between the old world view, based on argument from authority, and Galileos groundbreaking approach which placed the EVIDENCE above all other considerations. This is why he is regarded as the father of modern science. Today it seems ludicrous to us that noone had (for example) thought to test whether heavy and light objects would fall at the same rate. It was just too intuitively obvious to them to even question it.

There is a play by Bertold Brecht about the life of Galileo, in which a group of church elders arrive at his house to debate his theories. Regardless of the (dubious) historical accuracy of this, the key scene is where Galileo is begging the churchmen to just look through his telescope and see the moons of Jupiter for themselves. They refuse, preferring to sit down and have a theological debate about the perfect spheres or some such. This actually gets a laugh from the audience - how could they be so stupid? But it is a superb illustration of this complete shift in perspective.

In the modern scientific system, if a theory is contradicted by the evidence then it is WRONG. Simply wrong. No matter that Plato or Aristotle (or Newton or Einstein for that matter) believed it to be true. The argument from authority is back where it came from, and where it belongs - in the realm of superstition and religion.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Rigelian and JimBob, excellent points on Galileo - I see that you have read some of the latest historical work on his life. Most of which, by the way, supports your argument that events were much more complex than good Galileo versus bad Church.

You have nicely laid out the general terms of the disagreement between Galileo and the Church, but I would like to add that it wasn't strictly a case of "we say so" versus overwhelming scientific evidence. There was some criticism of the heliocentric model that I would consider legitimate from a scientific and mathematical perspective. Yes, Galileo had the moons of Jupiter, the phases of Venus, and the explanation of Mars' retrograde motion in his favor. But, since he continued to use Copernicus' circular orbital model, he could not explain why planets appear to speed up and slow down in their orbits (elliptical orbits solved this problem, but Galileo ignored Kepler's work), nor could he find stellar parallax. The idea behind parallax is that IF the Earth were moving, then we should see changes of position in stars relative to one another as we move across the heavens. With the instruments available at the time of Galileo's trial, no one could see parallax. Galileo's counter-argument was that the stars are so far away that the motion would be imperceptible. As it turns out he was right, but he could not prove it at the time.

Moreover, and perhaps even more problematic, was that there was a third option beyond the heliocentric and geocentric models: the Tychonic system. Tycho Brahe, perhaps the greatest observational astronomer of the time, had created a system that could explain all of Galileo's findings and still "save the appearances" and keep the Earth at the center of the universe. His system had the Earth at the center, the Sun revolving around the Earth, and all the other planets (except our moon, of course) revolving around the Sun. An ingenious system, really, and dynamically speaking it was the equivalent of the heliocentric model. So, Galileo's detractors could point to more than just theological problems with his work.

But it was, as Jimbob and Rigelian have pointed out, the theological problems that really got him in trouble. Especially his insistence that the Bible be interpreted metaphorically rather than literally. This was a clear intrusion on Church turf, and Urban VIII could not allow that to pass without some kind of punishment.

The other example, Giordano Bruno, is more compelling because he was burned at the stake (instead of being put under house arrest). But here again the story is more complex. It was really his refusal to accept the Holy Trinity, more than his scientific theories, that rendered him a heretic.

One Last point...(I'm almost done, I promise http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) Copernicus was actually a member of the Church (administering church property in Poland), and the reason that he was investigating astronomy was Calendar reform. The existing Calendar did not predict Easter well, and the Pope wanted to revise it in line with the actual motions of the planets. So, it was a religious reason that spurred Copernicus to work on the problem.

Sorry for the length of this post - I got carried away. This is one of my favorite historical topics.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

If the Church simply disagreed with Galileo's mathematics, then the Pope would not have threatened to excommunicate Galileo if he did not publicly renounce his works.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

I hope that my post did not imply that the only issue was mathematics. My point was that Galileo had not conclusively proven his argument; there remained some "scientific" ammunition for his adversaries - enough so that his views could be attacked on more than just theological grounds.

But, as was said earlier, the real issue was the Church's refusal to give up authority in the realm of physical reality, and Galileo's ill advised attempt to push the Church in that direction by making his view about biblical exegesis public. When he argued that the Bible should be read metaphorically, that was a clear intrusion into the Church's philosophical domain.

Getting back to your main argument that the Church held back science, I think the story is much more complex than the simple narrative given in the old textbooks. Yes, there was some conservatism in the Church, and yes, the condemnation of Galileo was a big mistake (one that has only recently been corrected). But, it is impossible to separate science from Christianity in the early modern period (1500-1789), because the vast majority of the leading figures in the history of science worked within a Christian framework (including Newton, whose work brought God back into the picture because of the mysterious, almost supernatural, force of gravity - it was not a strictly mechanical or material phenomenon). So, I do not think it is really useful to say that the Church held back scientific progress in any systematic way. The two are inextricably connected, and it is only our 21st-century perspective that creates such a clear cut dichotomy between church and science.

In any case, I imagine that neither one of us will convince the other. I have enjoyed the discussion, though. So, since I've contributed to a digression, I should probably wrap this up and bring the thread back on topic.

I have always found your SEIV advice useful, and I would most certainly would rate you a five (if I were able). Thanks again for your contributions to the forum.

[ March 09, 2003, 20:48: Message edited by: Chronon ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Church does not have a philosophical domain. It does not provide logical arguments for why it is right, it just says that what it says is right, period. So, there is no philosophy about it.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">My argument was that the Church held back advancement during the European Dark Ages, not during this period. I just could not think of any specific examples of people during the European Dark Ages that were persecuted for thinking for themselves.

[ March 09, 2003, 21:20: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

Since we're off topic, I thought I should open a new thread for this discussion. You'll find it here

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

This thread is already 100% off topic. Opening a new thread is redundant.

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wow, amazing. I had never heard of this guy, though I was familiar with his concept.
When did he live?
Where was he from?

And can his theory be the correct one? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT of OT: Rating Fyron -- no longer possible
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, his theory cannot be correct, although I don't have enough time to explain why at the moment.

However, he died from an infection after his bladder burst (That's why you should never hold it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) while he was making observations one night.