3
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 148:
Line 148: + +
no edit summary
:He wasn't in the scientific mainstream, biblical literalists or allegorists alike. I understand it was Washington Irving who gave the Columbus story its impetus, and materialists ran with the story without corroboration. So how is it ''not'' an atheist smear? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 15:31, 16 October 2015 (EDT)
:He wasn't in the scientific mainstream, biblical literalists or allegorists alike. I understand it was Washington Irving who gave the Columbus story its impetus, and materialists ran with the story without corroboration. So how is it ''not'' an atheist smear? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 15:31, 16 October 2015 (EDT)
:That he wasn't in the scientific mainstream is irrelevant to his motives; I only asserted he was a leading flat-earther. Prominent flat-earthers--such as Rowbotham, Lady Blount and Charles K Johnson--all based their views on interpretations of the Bible. There's no shortage of Bible verses that refer to the earth being immovable; there are also several references to a firmament and the "four corners of the Earth". This model was the general consensus prior to the ancient Greeks, who correctly deduced the sphericity of the earth. It's simply disingenuous to say that the flat-earth movement (or at least a section of it) never had religious motives.[[User:Paulb|Paulb]] ([[User talk:Paulb|talk]]) 08:22, 17 October 2015 (EDT)