Evolution v Creationism

**Rhyfelwyr** · 05-20-2009, 19:25

Which is all after he had to go causing controversy.

Really religion wasn't so oppressive as you want it to be. We have this idea nowadays that in the past if you spoke out against the church/general religious norms of the day, then everyone would be jumping in to cut his head off.

It's making the exact same mistake people do with Islam nowadays, saying it is completely anti-progress/whatever, without looking at the bigger picture or taking other factors into account. Most of the time you'll see their bark is worse than their bite.

**Adrian II** · 05-20-2009, 19:51

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

Which is all after he had to go ~~causing controversy~~ telling the truth about his observations.

Fixed it.

**Rhyfelwyr** · 05-20-2009, 20:04

The Pope had allowed Galileo to discuss his ideas for years, in fact he even gave his approval (the RCC was never big on literal readings of the Bible anyway as we know), it was only when Galileo deliberately misattributed something the Pope said to somebody else that he ended up on trial for heresy.

**Adrian II** · 05-20-2009, 20:25

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

The Pope had allowed Galileo to discuss his ideas for years, in fact he even gave his approval (the RCC was never big on literal readings of the Bible anyway as we know), it was only when Galileo deliberately misattributed something the Pope said to somebody else that he ended up on trial for heresy.

G. was sanctioned for his heliocentrist views, not his satirical Dialogo.

He was lucky he wasn't murdered like Giordano Bruno.

**Rhyfelwyr** · 05-20-2009, 20:39

Originally Posted by Adrian II

G. was sanctioned for his heliocentrist views, not his satirical Dialogo.

He was lucky he wasn't murdered like Giordano Bruno.

Again, power politics. The whole heliocentric/geocentric debate wasn't a case of poor genius scientist being oppressed by big nasty religious institution. The conflict was well rooted within the Papacy, for that reason the Pope was happy so long as Galileo kept his ideas away from the church, which is not that unreasonable.

In the end the only way the Pope could appear to justly sanction Galileo was on religious grounds, but the reality is pretty clear, I'm sure it was at the time as well.

**Adrian II** · 05-20-2009, 20:58

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

The conflict was well rooted within the Papacy, for that reason the Pope was happy so long as Galileo kept his ideas away from the church, which is not that unreasonable.

Not unreasonable?

It would have been reasonable if the Church had kept away from Galeleo Galilei. But they had pestered him since 1615, threatened him with torture and death like they had imposed on Giordano Bruno only thiry-odd years before.

It was power politics indeed, the weight of the institution was cast against an individual at the cost of science, conscience and freedom of expression. How profoundly silly to try and blame that charade on Galileo instead of on the kangaroos, and this nearly four hundred years after the fact.

Phooy!

**Rhyfelwyr** · 05-20-2009, 21:11

Originally Posted by Adrian II

Not unreasonable?

It would have been reasonable if the Church had kept away from Galeleo Galilei. But they had pestered him since 1615, threatened him with torture and death like they had imposed on Giordano Bruno only thiry-odd years before.

It was power politics indeed, the weight of the institution was cast against an individual at the cost of science, conscience and freedom of expression. How profoundly silly to try and blame that charade on Galileo instead of on the kangaroos, and this nearly four hundred years after the fact.

Phooy!

I'm not blaming it on Galileo (though he didn't exactly help himself), I'm just saying you can't blame it one the apparently singular evil entity that is religion. It's just power politics, just like when Hitler banned Darwin's works (yes you're getting a Godwin), or when any authoritarian institution bans stuff that threatens its authority.

A reason to moan about religion? I don't think so. You have to look at what was really going on (and you know there's something else going on when I'm defending the Catholic Church

)

**Kadagar_AV** · 05-20-2009, 20:10

Banquo's Ghost, you are right, he was found "vehemently suspect of heresy". My point, however, remains. Doesn't it?

Rhyfelwyr,

He didn't have to start attacking the Pope.

Oh, he attacked the pope? How stupid of me, here I thought he was presenting scientific research.

And I do find it humorous that you refer to the bigger picture. What have you learnt about religion vs science browsing through this thread, in reference to the bigger picture that is.

**Rhyfelwyr** · 05-20-2009, 20:16

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Oh, he attacked the pope? How stupid of me, here I thought he was presenting scientific research.

Not much to do with religion really. So his theories disagree with the scripture, note how nobody cares and he goes about his business for years. But then he starts writing lies about what the most important man in the world said... yeah power politics and all and disguised in the name of religion he gets made to apologise for heresy.

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

And I do find it humorous that you refer to the bigger picture. What have you learnt about religion vs science browsing through this thread, in reference to the bigger picture that is.

The bigger picture being that you keep blaming things on religion as if religion is one big bad thing and you never stop to think.. hey, maybe the Pope was really just keeping himself in power, because if you look at the situation its not really about religion. Just like with Islam nowadays... people say its all killings and bombings but any sane person will look at all the cultural baggage etc and only then can it make sense.

**Kadagar_AV** · 05-20-2009, 21:19

Rhyfelwyr, I was not refering to Galileo and the pope, but creationism and evolution... What the therad was about, remember?

**RoadKill** · 05-20-2009, 22:15

I enjoy the idea of Evolution co-existing with Creationism. Creationism can be shown throughout humanity. Your watch, your laptop, your t.v, all examples of creationism. The parts of a watch have their own function in order for the watch to work. And just like our bodies we rely on the function of several body parts. However we as a species evolve because our body has the availability to do that. (Adaptation). If technology can reach far enough we could make watches reproduce.

That what I don't understand why do people always think there is always only one solution.

**Askthepizzaguy** · 05-20-2009, 22:21

To be fair though, technology EVOLVED through the many, many centuries by IMPROVING UPON EXISTING MODELS and allowing obsolete or less functional models to be NATURALLY SELECTED against.

The laptop computer did not appear out of dust one day. It took thousands of years of scientific progress and the evolution of human knowledge.

Even "intelligent design" requires evolution in this, the real world.