Statue of Galileo Planned for Vatican 333
Reservoir Hill writes "Four hundred years after it put Galileo on trial for heresy the Vatican is to complete its rehabilitation of the scientist by erecting a statue of him inside Vatican walls. The planned statue is to stand in the Vatican gardens near the apartment in which Galileo was incarcerated. He was held there while awaiting trial in 1633 for advocating heliocentrism, the Copernican doctrine that the Earth revolves around the Sun. The move coincides with a series of celebrations in the run-up to next year's 400th anniversary of Galileo's development of the telescope. In January Pope Benedict XVI called off a visit to Sapienza University, Rome, after staff and students accused him of defending the Inquisition's condemnation of Galileo. The Vatican said that the Pope had been misquoted and since the episode, several of the professors have retracted their protest."
i want a giordano bruno statue (Score:5, Interesting)
The Museum of History of Science (Score:5, Interesting)
Sadly for Giordano Bruno, he didn't have Galileo's powerful protectors and was a bit too all-out mystical. Roger Bacon just got locked up for years for suggesting that Arab science should be adopted to ease the work of the poor - can't have peasants having free time to think about things. However, the Church at least has a history of adopting ideas once they've been safely mainstream for a few hundred years. Some of the Protestant sects seem intent on actually going backwards, hence the drive towards Bible literalism (which wouldn't have been understood by most of the early Church fathers, but is a peculiar product of 19th century Protestantism separated by an ocean from its roots.)
Re:The church IS a dictatorship (Score:5, Interesting)
Breath of fresh air... (Score:5, Interesting)
Though I'm not Catholic (atheist), I respect the Vatican for trying to understand how science merge with their faith, instead of bending science to their faith. Considering the horror stories that I see and hear about creationist faith (cringe!), this is a breath of fresh air!
My $0.02 CAD
Re:They've got to be kidding (Score:3, Interesting)
That would have a pretty high chance of causing/accelerating their downfall, and such an organization of course has some interest in selfpreservation.
I'm not convinced their downfall is a good thing either, as I prefer Christianity/Catholisim over Islamism as the leading world religion. A lot.
In all the things to say about this.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Personally, as a non-theist (I don't care for the term atheist as it implies hostility toward religious people), all I can do is respect these great men for their part in helping explain the universe.
Galileo would have been deeply honored (or so I believe), so I respect what the Church is doing here.
Re:The church IS a dictatorship (Score:3, Interesting)
Because that's one of the things that dictators do. Including the Roman Catholic Church who burned people at the stake for heresy.
Re:Breath of fresh air... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:cool (Score:1, Interesting)
Actually, there still is quite a bit of this too. And the Discovery Institute is a case in point. Most of its members are scientists with Ph.D.s who teach in universities. Guillermo Gonzalez was a professor of Astronomy at my alma mater, Iowa State University. You can't just dismiss them and say there is no controversy in the scientific community, when they teach and research science for a living, and hold the same degrees and positions as other academics. To say there is no controversy is to define the scientific community as only those scientists that believe in Evolution, and while many people clearly do try to do just that, such an approach smacks of arrogance, and doesn't make a lot of sense, because again, save this one area of disagreement, these people are indistinguishable from other scientists.
Side note: There are other scientists who take issue with evolution as well, but aren't in the Discovery Institute because they know that is the kiss of death to anyone seeking tenure.
Other note: I have said nothing about my personal views, so don't start making assumptions and arguing the merits of evolution with me. I confine my post entirely to the point that saying there is no controversy in the scientific community is ridiculous.
troll hunting (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:cool (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I'm a little bothered (Score:3, Interesting)
Evil is as evil does. Just because it was acceptable treatment back then doesn't mean it was ok. Today it seems to be acceptable to have people assaulted, robbed, kidnapped and held for years just because they possess a little cannabis. In 400 years I'm sure it will be seen as barbaric, and it is. Galileo's treatment was no less barbaric.
Speaking of Lightning... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:cool (Score:3, Interesting)
But this is part of the problem with debating Creationists. They set up the argument not for the sake of rational, logical discussion. Rather, they set up the arguments in a "zinger" format. Cheap shots and short, nice-sounding answers win the day, while complex explanations of the subject matter get drowned out in about two sentences. It is really the intellectual equivalent of flinging dung. They are simply interested in "winning" the argument rather than discussing the issues. You can't win against someone whose sole debate tactic is to fling dung at you. You only wind up with shit all over you.
Re:cool (Score:3, Interesting)
Why, there isn't one. They simply want to create doubt about the established theories, with nothing but vague illusions to "design" that must naturally include a designer. Or perhaps they're all really Zen Buddhists, who just pose koans to us to create that Great Doubt that when broken, brings us to a state of Satori.
Greg Bear had an interesting take on the idea in Darwin's Radio, suggesting that perhaps there is some intelligent design going on, but that the design itself is an evolved mechanism. The eventual expression of the design "toolkit" that surfaces in humanity in is of course waaaay Out There sci-fi stuff in the books, but there's a nugget of truth to it. The stimuli might be random, but it appears that evolution has a trick or two in directing itself. No outside designer needed.
Did anyone read Benedict's controversial remarks? (Score:4, Interesting)
I managed to find a translation -- the BBC pointed me in the right direction when the news story broke. The translation is pretty difficult reading, because it's full of flowery language and doesn't come right out and give you convenient bullet points. However, here were my take-aways from my reading of this document:
Of course, every time Pope Benedict opens his mouth to insert his foot, the Vatican handlers around him are certain to claim that his remarks were taken out of context. It's really hard to see how they can claim that with a straight face this time. I'm willing to acknowledge that the translations available are not perfect, but I can't believe they'd be so bad as to say the opposite of what the source material appears to be saying.
John Paul II is a tough act to follow.
Re:Galileo is not being rehabilitated (Score:4, Interesting)