:Are you talking to me? The 80% number is mine but it was sort of a joke. What I believe is that none of us really knows the facts—and nobody knows exactly what it means when Encarta says "The Dialogue was ordered to be burned." Probably none of us is interested in researching what is or isn't known about the actual book-burning. So we are searching for language that everyone is happy with. RSchlafly, I think, is seeking to fine-tune the language to keep it out of the Galileo-good-Church-wicked narrative groove. Why not? What difference does it make? In either case, it's clear that the Church officials at the time were trying to suppress the book. "Burning books" is incendiary language, and to me at least evokes images of Hitler, etc. so if RSchlafly wants to be careful about the language, let him. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 13:33, 5 May 2007 (EDT) | :Are you talking to me? The 80% number is mine but it was sort of a joke. What I believe is that none of us really knows the facts—and nobody knows exactly what it means when Encarta says "The Dialogue was ordered to be burned." Probably none of us is interested in researching what is or isn't known about the actual book-burning. So we are searching for language that everyone is happy with. RSchlafly, I think, is seeking to fine-tune the language to keep it out of the Galileo-good-Church-wicked narrative groove. Why not? What difference does it make? In either case, it's clear that the Church officials at the time were trying to suppress the book. "Burning books" is incendiary language, and to me at least evokes images of Hitler, etc. so if RSchlafly wants to be careful about the language, let him. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 13:33, 5 May 2007 (EDT) |