On 01-28-98, KEITH KNAPP declared to ROBERT PLETT:
KK>RP>The Church didn't
KK>RP>think up charges against Galileo on its own, scientists and academia
KK>RP>brought those charges to the Church and the willing actors in it who
KK>RP>then ran with with them,
KK>Gingerich shows quite clearly that G's opposition were theologians,
KK>as did the Pope in a 1992 statement, referred to "....Galileo's
KK>judges, incapable of dissociating faith from an age-old cosmology...."
None of what you posted mitigates against my original comments, which
noted two things: the "willing actors" in the Church, and the corruption
of it by the views of Aristotle.  Galileo's original opposition, which
continued after they got the Church involved and for decades afterward,
was from scientists and academics.  I repeat, they simply used the power
available to them to discredit Galileo's discoveries, and had the Church
not had that power, they would've used whatever power existed to
accomplish that end, so certain were they of the Aristotlean view.

KK>RP>                                 and most certainly never, ever,
KK>RP>taught to anyone in public schools.
KK>If you want creationism taught in public-school science classes,
KK>the best approach would be to find some actual science to support it.
KK>Right now, it's just Genesis with the religious words removed.
There are plenty of evidences against the theory of evolution, and
plenty supporting a creation view, and in sufficient quantity to move
many an evolutionist to disavow the theory.  Some have been authors of
textbooks on the subject, like Colin Patterson, curator, British Museum
of Natural History, who disavowed everything he'd written supporting
evolution, and apologized for having been responsible for misleading so
many for so long.
Stephen Gould, being refreshingly honest, stated very forthrightly in
one of PBS's dinosaur shows (one pursuing the idea that dinosaurs and
birds are close relation) that he can't prove evolution is true, but
continues to believe in it, not because of evidence, but simply because
he prefers it to the idea that God did it.
KK>RP>Neither Galileo or Newton believed their discoveries contradicted
KK>RP>scripture, and in fact, their discoveries were not a contradiction of
KK>RP>them.  The idea that the earth was the center of the universe is NOT in
KK>RP>scripture,
KK>Gingerich mentions Psalm 104 and that part in Joshua where the sun is
KK>made to stand still, as being used by Galileo's opposition.
Used by Galileo's opposition, yes, but erroneously so.  Use of those
passages in such a way is equivalent to claiming that "sunrise" and
"sunset" in today's weather reports are statements indicating
meteorologists believe that the sun revolves around the earth.  The
idiots in Galileo's day also based their claims about the number of
planets on the structure of the human body and other similar silliness.
KK>RP>          nor was heliocentrism ever declared a heresy.  That idea came
KK>RP>from the likes of Aristotle, "Master of Those Who Know", whose ideas
KK>RP>were accepted by the scientists of the time, and they in turn corrupted
KK>RP>the Church with those same ideas.  We suffer similar in our time.
KK>Gingerich again:
KK>  "In the end the pope's conservative advisers won out, and Galileo
KK>   received an unexpectedly harsh sentence.  He was forced to abjure
KK>   a 'vehement suspicion of heresy' and to recite a humiliating
KK>   confession.  But in essence the verdict was imposed for disobeying
KK>   orders, not heresy.  One of the Vatican's leading apologists,
KK>   Giambattista Riccioli, later wrote that the Copernican opinion
KK>   had, as a result, become heretical, or at least erroneous...."
Heretical in the eyes of certain individuals, but never declared heresy
by the Church.  Erroneous in the eyes of scientists and academics.  A
group of monks, Franciscan if I remember correctly, verified Galileo's
observations and agreed with his conclusions long before the controversy
came to a head.  Unfortunately, they were silenced by the PC of the
time.
Bob     /\-/\   - proud Ilk   homebody@galstar.com
C.A.T. ( o o ) Chapter Ilks
       == ^ ==
Green Country - Oklahoma      http://www.galstar.com/~homebody/
 * SLMR 2.1a * Some people have no redeeming characteristics at all.
---------------