Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Science

Copernicus Reburied As Hero 369

Posted by timothy
from the late-to-the-party dept.
CasualFriday writes "Mikolaj Kopernik, a.k.a. Nicolaus Copernicus, the 16th-century astronomer whose findings were condemned by the Roman Catholic Church as heretical, was reburied by Polish priests as a hero on Saturday, nearly 500 years after he was laid to rest in an unmarked grave. On Saturday, his remains were blessed with holy water by some of Poland's highest-ranking clerics before an honor guard ceremoniously carried his coffin through the imposing red brick cathedral and lowered it back into the same spot where part of his skull and other bones were found in 2005."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Copernicus Reburied As Hero

Comments Filter:
  • by masterwit (1800118) * on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:28PM (#32316174) Journal

    Jacek Jezierski, a local bishop who encouraged the search for Copernicus, said that he considers Copernicus' burial as part of the church's broader embrace of science as being compatible with Biblical belief.

    In the end it's just one big format war...

    • by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:57PM (#32316424) Homepage Journal

      embrace of science as being compatible with Biblical belief.

      But not vice versa.

      • by blai (1380673) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:39PM (#32316732)
        You're absolutely right. Not all beliefs are compatible with facts. Facts do not encompass all beliefs. Science is not a religion and religion is not a science. That's like saying a pen is bad because you can't build a house with it. That's not what it's for. It isn't what you think it is, nor is it what you think it isn't even if you are correct.
        • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:48PM (#32316832) Journal
          Trouble is, religions have this nasty habit of attempting to make claims that are, in fact, empirically verifiable (or, typically, falsifiable), and then throwing a fit when science calls them on it.

          For sufficiently vacuous definitions of religion, and definitions of science that bend over backwards to be purely descriptive, the two are compatible. However, as an empirical matter, incompatibilities are frequently observed.
          • by Moraelin (679338) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @07:35PM (#32318572) Journal

            1. You have to put it into perspective though. All of the verses that posited an immovable Earth at the centre of everything are Old Testament, and by all accepted chronologies most were already 2000 years old or more at the time Copernicus got his ideas. (Though Earth being flat does get a nod in Matthew 4:8, which is late 1'st century AD. So even that would be very nearly 1500 years old in the time of Copernicus.)

            I'd say that's pretty good covering their asses if it took that long before it was even possible to call them on it.

            Stuff that was easier testable, well, they seem to have usually written the prophecy after the event.

            2. Well, at least the Catholics seem to have given up on the throwing a fit part since the counter-reformation or so. Now it's just a mystery, or the Lord is using metaphoric language, or those who wrote it down didn't get it quite right. So when Genesis says there were trees with seed (at the earliest that would be the late carboniferous era, and even that's stretching it) before there was a sun created at all, well, the Lord was _actually_ saying there must have been some single-celled algae before the cloud cover first broke and the sun was visible.

            I'm not kidding. If you listen to some of them, some verses in Genesis even describe the Theia impact. Of course, you wouldn't recognize it without being told where and how to mis-read it.

            It's a more perverse setup, where falsifying it is akin to nailing jello to the wall. No matter what's written there, and how you think you finally have proof that all possible interpretations are plain old wrong, there comes the "but we're not literalists" blanket excuse and that's the end of it. If it says "black" there and you've measured it as white, well,the Lord of course meant "white" and was just metaphoric about it. So, natch, you haven't falsified it.

            Of course, I also never got a good answer to "so what good is a book which really doesn't tell you anything you didn't already know? Because apparently to find X in it, you already have to know about X so you can read something as meaning X."

    • Yeah, just watch out for some company with submarine patents on organized religion. Now there's a patent troll I highly approve of!
    • by PPH (736903)
      It makes one wonder where they'll bury Richard Stallman and Bill Joy (creators of emacs and vi, respectively) when they die.
    • "To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge," MK.
  • by Sowelu (713889) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:31PM (#32316194)
    Say what you will about it being too little, too late, but I'm glad that they're going back and recognizing past mistakes and trying to do what little they can to right them. Especially so that others can see how they've changed in the meantime. Ideally it'll change the behavior of those still alive today...
    • They're doing this as a PR stunt to distract people from the mistakes they're making today.

      Copernicus is known in almost every science class today. Who cares what The Church does with whatever-is-left-of-his-body now? 500 years later?

      • by VTI9600 (1143169) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:38PM (#32316718)

        They're doing this as a PR stunt to distract people from the mistakes they're making today.

        If I designed a device to automatically lower fresh tinfoil hats from the ceiling whenever the one you're wearing now got worn out, I would make a mint.

        Who cares what The Church does with whatever-is-left-of-his-body now? 500 years later?

        Catholics care. They care because they believe in the sacrament of forgiveness. They care because they believe that people have immortal souls that can last more than 500 years after someone's death.

        • by Fractal Dice (696349) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @04:47PM (#32317306) Journal

          Strange that a religion that claims to be so forgiving is also always threatening eternal torment to anyone who disobeys them ... an organization that claims to be the standard bearer of all things good uses the exact same psychological framework as an abusive relationship?

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by VTI9600 (1143169)

            The Catholic church teaches that Hell is the absence of God's grace, and not a literal physical torment. Catholics do not threaten people with torture (admittedly, not in recent years). That sort of thing is what you will hear coming from the various non-Catholic Christian sects in the US. The church knows that they have made mistakes. Nowadays, they teach the concept of a "living" church...one that acknowledges that change is inevitable and usually for the best.

            I will admit though, that most of these refor

        • by VendettaMF (629699) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @06:15PM (#32317974) Homepage

          So, you're saying that they are now forgiving Copernicus for being right all along?

          Even as religious statements go that's pretty lame.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by 0xdeadbeef (28836)

          Catholics care. They care because they believe in the sacrament of forgiveness. They care because they believe that people have immortal souls that can last more than 500 years after someone's death.

          Somehow I doubt Copernicus is going to forgive them.

          • by VTI9600 (1143169) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @08:28PM (#32318930)

            Why not? He was one of them. He was employed by them. They were his friends and family. They didn't kill him. He died of natural causes (a stroke in his 70's). They just said that his idea of a heliocentric earth (one of many achievements) was heretical, but well after the fact. And then they admitted that they were wrong. What's not to forgive?

      • by T Murphy (1054674) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:40PM (#32316750) Journal
        The Catholic church recognizes it has a bad history with reacting to science, so they are trying to make up for that, yet it seems any effort to do so just that brings more complaints. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

        By this point, the Catholic church has mostly improved from malicious to benign on the science front (they may contest doing research in certain areas of science on moral grounds, but they don't really try to contradict science anymore). Most of the anti-science creationism and whatnot isn't from the Catholic church.

        Disclaimer: I was raised Catholic and appreciate most of the philosophy but don't care for the religion.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by syousef (465911)

        They're doing this as a PR stunt to distract people from the mistakes they're making today.

        Copernicus is known in almost every science class today. Who cares what The Church does with whatever-is-left-of-his-body now? 500 years later?

        Q: What's the definition of infallible?

        A: Get it completely wrong, persecute people who used actual science to get it right - I mean REALLY persecute them - put your political agenda and your authority ahead of truth - threaten them with torcher, put them under house arrest, deny them medical aid, make them fear for their lives, threaten them with eternal damnation - then 400-500 years later admit that your predecessors made a mistake and make use of the very science you tried to bury to shout from the roof

        • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 23, 2010 @08:17PM (#32318866)

          Well, then I guess I'll piss you off even further by pointing out that Galileo's views were discredited by actual DATA at the time. The most accurate data they had at his time did not support his interpretation. So no, scientific truth was not buried because of politics, scientific falsehoods (as judged by the scientific community of the day) were buried because of politics. Condemning the house arrest of political dissidents in an era when those unpopular with the rulers were often killed out of hand is as silly as complaining that Attila the Hun failed to abide by the Geneva Conventions.

          As to the infallibility question, the doctrine you refer to only applies when the Pope makes a ruling that he declares infallible, not in everyday decisions. Think of this as the difference between Lehman Brothers putting out a stock prediction and claiming to have received information from the future that this will be the price.

  • Typical (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:34PM (#32316210)

    I'm glad the church recognizes the value of bleeding-edge Renaissance science. Maybe next year they will find out the importance of electricity, birth control, or logic.

  • by spire3661 (1038968) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:34PM (#32316214) Journal
    Sometimes, i just dont understand people's motivation for this sort of thing. Copernicus was a great man, why on earth do we need to dig up his corpse and rebury him to honor his achievements? The mere fact that we discuss him and his work 500 years later is the greatest honor. There are times were circus and spectacle are needed, this is not one of them.
    • by MyLongNickName (822545) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:43PM (#32316308) Journal

      Why is it that when I have mod points that I want to use on a thread I always end up commenting instead?

      Anyhow, you may not find it important, but others do. This is the equivalent of saying "we fucked up big time and we are reversing ourselves". Large organizations show real remorse differently than individuals. So, this is a very large positive step.

      Now, why it took 500 years to figure this out is another story altogether.

      • papal infallibility ?

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by SharpFang (651121)

        It would be significantly shorter than 500 years if they knew -where- Copernicus was buried...
        Location of his grave was one of bigger historical secrets in Poland. (and the fact that the suspected location was a chamber filled with thousands of bones from many, many corpses, mixed in disarray, didn't make it any easier. It's been a luck that his corpse was found in a casket, and not in 300 pieces mixed with all the rest...

      • by MightyMartian (840721) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @07:30PM (#32318534) Journal

        Anyhow, you may not find it important, but others do. This is the equivalent of saying "we fucked up big time and we are reversing ourselves". Large organizations show real remorse differently than individuals. So, this is a very large positive step.

        In other words, they're just trying to salve their own consciences. This is like the British government apologizing for how they treated Alan Turing. "Oh well, we're so much better now, so please forgive us." On one level it's idiotic because the guy is dead, in Copernicus's case loooong dead, so it does him no good. On another level, it's just a bunch of self-righteous bastards trying to show us how keenly they feel about it.

        If the Church wants to convince me that it isn't still an enemy of science, it can start by stopping spreading bullshit about the effectiveness of condoms. Apologizing for Copernicus is cheap, relatively speaking, because it doesn't mean having to sacrifice a current position. I'd like to see the Church do something in the way of contrition that had the vaguest bit of meaning in the here and now.

    • by ceoyoyo (59147) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:48PM (#32316344)

      Copernicus' remains were recovered as part of an archaeological discovery. Would you suggest not reburying them? Or perhaps just tossing them back in the hole and throwing the dirt back in?

      • by T Murphy (1054674) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:56PM (#32316418) Journal
        How about send his remains to an Earth/sun Lagrangian point, so if you look at it the right way, it's like the sun is orbiting around him.
        • by vlad30 (44644)
          As opposed to shining from where ?
        • End of thread. (Score:2, Informative)

          by glavenoid (636808)
          You win!
        • by RevWaldo (1186281) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:45PM (#32316790)
          I'd think that having his remains orbit the Earth Scotty-style would do as a fitting tribute. But this does raise the issue of "whose remains are they anyway"? The cathedral that the remains were originally buried and now reburied would probably have the final say on the launch, and its doubtful they'd go along. It's a little vexing that the church that condemned him in the first place essentially still control his remains five centuries on.

          .
      • by VTI9600 (1143169) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:58PM (#32316924)

        This was no ordinary discovery. According to TFA, they spent six years searching for the remains. Once they were found, they used DNA markers (!) and facial bone reconstruction to positively identify the man as Copernicus. Everyone joking about how the church is 500 years behind in technology should take note.

        • Once they were found, they used DNA markers (!) and facial bone reconstruction to positively identify the man as Copernicus. Everyone joking about how the church is 500 years behind in technology should take note.

          What, they have archbishops with degrees in molecular genetics now? Oh, wait, they probably used a biotech company to do that...

          • by VTI9600 (1143169) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @08:08PM (#32318792)

            Actually they used police forensic experts, who (surprise, surprise) were probably not priests. Darn. I guess you got me. You'll probably even point out that I goofed when I said they took six years even though they actually found the bones in 2005 after starting in 2004. In any case, it does not change the fact that the church is painfully well aware of advances in modern science and doing the best it can to reconcile those with their beliefs and those of their faithful followers.

    • Weeel, guess who has something to gain from this... regarding the recent... well... scandal..?

    • by Kjella (173770)

      Well it's hardly the first time that bodies of e.g. saints have been moved and reburied, often to build a church on top of them. Does it have any real meaning where the bones lie and how they got buried if at all? Well, it's a bit like questioning if offside is real in soccer because within the rites and ceremonies of the Church it certainly matters. For example, even if it doesn't apply to Copernicus, being denied a Christian burial was a grave punishment. Of course an atheist can just shrug at that and go

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Vadim Makarov (529622)
      Sometimes, i just dont understand people's motivation for this sort of thing. Copernicus was a great man, why on earth do we need to dig up his corpse and rebury him to honor his achievements?

      I think in essence this is a church advert. (They couldn't care less of the science he has discovered. Religion needs promotion. Same happened at the death of Newton.)

    • by Joce640k (829181)

      Um, they didn't just dig him up so they could put him back again. He was in an unmarked grave which was dug up by archaeologists. After investigation, they figured out who it was.

      What do *you* suggest they should do with the bones? Hmmm?

      Throw them in the trash ... or rebury them with dignity and a proper headstone?

    • by mrmeval (662166)

      It wasn't for him or his work. It was to benefit Poland and the church. Poland gets to beat it's chest and say "Look at what we did." The church can point and say "Clean hands, clean hands, we are no longer evil".

      It's as if they were saying "Let them eat tripe."

    • by gmuslera (3436)
      For Copernicus make no difference. For people that don't follow their faith, makes very little (recognizing that they were wrong from an organization that have the "Truth" handled to them personally by god himself, is somewhat good) For Church, and people that believes what they teach, moved someone that didnt deserve from Hell to Heaven.
    • by nurb432 (527695)

      Its guilt from the church as they realize they are a closed minded establishment and look stupid. Only took them 500 years on this one.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by RobertLTux (260313)

      the trick is that he was buried in an UNMARKED grave (and i suppose it was not "holy ground")
      so as part of the paper work they had to

      Exume the body/bones
      "ReSanctify" the ground and prep for the burial
      Do a whole burial ceremony
      File the 21 chunks of paper that The Church requires

      Its all a bunch of Red Tape (and how many not Chinese bureaucracies are around that date from 2 Millenniums ago??)

    • by Arancaytar (966377) <arancaytar.ilyaran@gmail.com> on Sunday May 23, 2010 @10:36PM (#32319684) Homepage

      It's like when in 1992, the pope apologized for putting Galileo on trial. Yeah, the gesture is pretty symbolic and centuries late, but it's at least one way to look like less of an asshat.

      Now, once they stop telling people in Africa that condoms cause AIDS, maybe their apology will actually appear sincere instead of lying through their teeth for the PR.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:34PM (#32316216)

    Copernicus' burial in an anonymous grave in the 16th century was not linked to suspicions of heresy. When he died, his ideas were just starting to be discussed by a small group of European astronomers, astrologers and mathematicians, and the church was not yet forcefully condemning the heliocentric world view as heresy, according to Jack Repcheck, author of "Copernicus' Secret: How the Scientific Revolution Began."

    "Why was he just buried along with everyone else, like every other canon in Frombork? Because at the time of his death he was just any other canon in Frombork. He was not the iconic hero that he has become."

  • by Dyinobal (1427207) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:39PM (#32316256)
    Does this mean he gets to go to heaven now? or just that his body got violated by a bunch of priests.
  • I'm sure (Score:4, Insightful)

    by phantomfive (622387) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:44PM (#32316318) Journal
    I'm sure he feels just about the same being buried in the new grave as he did about being buried in the old one. He doesn't care at all.
    • Re:I'm sure (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Rakshasa Taisab (244699) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:49PM (#32316356) Homepage
      And stupid people keep thinking burials are for the dead, not the living.
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by TheRaven64 (641858)
        I'm sure that all of his friends and relatives will find the grieving process much easier now he's been buried properly.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by IICV (652597)

        Yeah exactly! The living need to be advertised to -

        "Look at us! We're the new Catholic Church, we're no longer pro-heliocentrism! Give us a couple more centuries and we might even stop being anti-feminist* enough to allow contraception** or female priests***!"

        Because that's exactly what it is, unless you think that Copernicus still has a close, living relative somewhere who needs closure after 500 years.

        *not a guarantee
        **not very likely
        ***you're kidding, right?

    • Re: (Score:2, Redundant)

      by poena.dare (306891)

      Symbols have power. I don't see any harm in showing respect for a noted independent thinker. Also, any act that demonstrates that religion and science do not have to be in opposition is a Good Thing.

      Furthermore, in deference to his religious beliefs, I'll imagine he is pleased.

      • Re:I'm sure (Score:4, Insightful)

        by obarthelemy (160321) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:56PM (#32316414)

        I'd rather the church put a bit more effort in making life better for the living

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Chardish (529780)

          Billions of dollars spent annually on charities, schools, hospitals, homeless shelters, and relief efforts isn't good enough for you?

      • Alternatively you could not rely on symbols to show that religion and science do not have to be in opposition, you could just take the straight forward method and actually take actions now, in real time, that demonstrate, to people alive right now, that religion and science don't have to be in opposition. Not that it matters much because science gained the upper hand long ago and can't effectively be stopped any longer. By locking people up or forcing them to recant on pain of torture, anyway.

        As for a Coper

        • Dig up people you used to persecute or burn incense and chant, it doesn't matter in any practical way to anyone with any sense.

          But to the majority of people in the world, these things matter, changing their opinion, world view, etc. So, since these things matter to the majority, they should have import to anybody with the sense to realize that what matters to most people should matter (in some way) to us all. See what I did there?

          • Exactly. I gave up my Dawkins-like hatred for organized religion somewhere in my 40s. I'd rather attract "victims" (heh heh) to critical thought with sweet science than pour vinegar on someone's religion.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Stuntmonkey (557875)

              Exactly. I gave up my Dawkins-like hatred for organized religion somewhere in my 40s. I'd rather attract "victims" (heh heh) to critical thought with sweet science than pour vinegar on someone's religion.

              The people in the history books who brought about social change were mostly all "obnoxious" in their time (Galileo, Rosa Parks, ...). These were people willing to go to the mat for what they believed. Time will tell with Dawkins, but he's certainly brave and I respect that. And there are certainly enou

  • by SetupWeasel (54062) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @02:49PM (#32316348) Homepage

    No. Wait. He's dead. He doesn't care at all what you do to his bones.

  • I've been an admirer of Canon Kupfernigk since I learned about his work and his book at University. Since the root of his name means "copper" (Kupfer in German) and I spent a number of years working for a company that did interesting things with copper alloys, I adopted his name as my Internet nick. I'm pleased that the Church eventually caught up with the historians of science, but I have only one question for Benedict 16th: What the Hell took you so long?
    • by dwye (1127395)

      > but I have only one question for Benedict 16th: What the Hell took you so long?

      He hasn't been Pope for that long, perhaps, and has been busy with problems related to living priests and has only now got to dead ones?

  • by webbiedave (1631473) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:17PM (#32316582)
    Church Admits Touching Children and Covering it Up Not Such a Good Idea.

    Pope John Paul George Ringo the Third officially stated via the openly gay pontiff's Jupiter-hosted website [www.catholic.popestuff2], "We've had a little time to think about it and we finally understand that whole uproar or whatever. Hey like the third testament says in Bieber 10:15 'Whatever you want shawty I'll give it to ya'."

    He went on to say, "Here's some water! Hope that makes up for it."

    Editor's Note: Catholicism was a dominant religion centuries ago in which old men in funny hats told others what to do.

    Editor's Editor's Note: Religion was a wide-held belief that ideas found in stories millenniums old should be used to rule our lives. Not kidding.

    (article translated from Chinese via Skybot Vacuum Cleaner with Babel Attachment)
    • by VTI9600 (1143169)

      Church Admits Touching Children and Covering it Up Not Such a Good Idea.

      Thanks. They've already admitted that, Troll.

      • Yeah. They were all over that when the story broke. Right on top of it. Handled it great.

        That's kinda my point. Get it? Good. Now move on.
  • umm (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nomadic (141991) <nomadicworld@NOSpam.gmail.com> on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:21PM (#32316610) Homepage
    Mikolaj Kopernik, AKA Nicolaus Copernicus, the 16th-century astronomer whose findings were condemned by the Roman Catholic Church as heretical,

    Do we have a cite for this?
  • So... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rrohbeck (944847) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:23PM (#32316626)

    How long until Richard Dawkins will be sainted? 2510?

    • by JoshuaZ (1134087)

      How long until Richard Dawkins will be sainted? 2510?

      Considering that being a saint means that the Church is very sure the person got to heaven, my guess is that isn't going to happen. There are only two scenarios which I can imagine would alter this. 1) Dawkins could have a complete change of heart and publicly convert to Catholicism. 2) The Catholic Church could change its doctrines to some form of universal salvation and declare that all dead people to be saints or close enough for it to include Dawkins. Neither of these seems like a likely scenario, with

  • by JoshuaZ (1134087) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @03:34PM (#32316694) Homepage
    There are a lot of misconceptions about what Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and all the other important figures during this time period were doing. For example, a lot of people don't realize that the system constructed by Copernicus still had epicycles. It was more aesthetically pleasing and slightly simpler mathematically than the Ptolemaic system but it wasn't actually more accurate. It wasn't until Kepler came around that a system that was genuinely superior in both simplicity and accurate. Also, people seem to forget that a major reason for Copernicus' work was that the Church wanted a more accurate astronomical system because they needed it to calculate the dates for Easter and other issues. And the Roman Catholic Church didn't even take a negative stance to heliocentrism until many years after Copernicus. Martin Luther and some of the other early Protestants reacted negatively far years before the Church did. The actual history is much more complicated than the standard narratives make it out to be. There are two excellent books on this topic. The first is Thomas Kuhn's "The Copernican Revolution" which presents the history pretty well although it gets filtered slightly through Kuhn's philosophy. The second is Alan Hirschfield's "Parallax" which takes a broader outlook over a much longer time period but with less detail on the period directly after Copernicus. Both books are very good reads.
  • From TFA:

    The tombstone is decorated with a model of the solar system, a golden sun encircled by six of the planets.

    They stopped after Saturn because the next one is...you know...*dirty*

  • by hedrick (701605) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @06:04PM (#32317894)

    In case anyone is interested, I just looked to see what was actually done about Copernicus. No action was taken during his lifetime. During the Galileo affair, motion around the sun was declared to be erroneous and heretical. Thus Copernicus' major work was taken out of circulation for 4 years, until it could be "corrected." 9 or 10 corrections were made, which appear to have been simply inserting the word "hypothetically" or equivalent, on the grounds that it was a hypothesis that hadn't been proven.

    Note that I am not defending the actions of the Catholic Church. I just thought people might want to know what they were. The uncorrected version was put on the Index.The "corrected" version was not, so it continued to circulate. The source I looked at (http://hsci.ou.edu/exhibits/exhibit.php?exbgrp=1&exbid=14&exbpg=4) says that there was no official finding that Copernicus was heretical, although it appears that there was a general condemnation of heliocentrism (at least this is how I read a couple of seemingly contradictory statements).

  • by VendettaMF (629699) on Sunday May 23, 2010 @06:19PM (#32317998) Homepage

    Great Scientist's Remains Further Desecrated in Black Magic Ritual Effort to Distract Citizenry.

God doesn't play dice. -- Albert Einstein

Working...