Changes

The best known case of scientific dogmatism occurred in the early 17th century when Italy's established church clung to the [[Aristotelian]] notion of all the [[planet]]s (and the [[Sun]]) revolving around the Earth. [[Copernicus]], supported by [[Galileo]] (in Italy) and [[Kepler]] (outside of Italy) suggested a simpler explanation: that the Earth, along with the other planets, revolve around the Sun. Galileo was censured for making this argument and given the mild but daunting punishment of lifetime [[house arrest]].  

The best known case of scientific dogmatism occurred in the early 17th century when Italy's established church clung to the [[Aristotelian]] notion of all the [[planet]]s (and the [[Sun]]) revolving around the Earth. [[Copernicus]], supported by [[Galileo]] (in Italy) and [[Kepler]] (outside of Italy) suggested a simpler explanation: that the Earth, along with the other planets, revolve around the Sun. Galileo was censured for making this argument and given the mild but daunting punishment of lifetime [[house arrest]].  

In the 19th and 20th centuries, the idea of [[naturalistic evolution]] became the modern [[dogma]] of [[biology]]. Many scientists have found evidence of flaws in traditional view that undirected mutations alone would add up to important organic differences such as an entirely [[genus]] (i.e., group of related [[species]]). Yet because of scientific dogmatism, they fear reprisals for publishing this evidence. They could lose positions, tenure, and even employment.  

In the 19th and 20th centuries, the idea of [[naturalistic evolution]] became the modern [[dogma]] of [[biology]]. Many scientists have found evidence of flaws in the traditional view that undirected mutations alone would add up to important organic differences such as an entirely [[genus]] (i.e., group of related [[species]]). Yet because of scientific dogmatism, they fear reprisals for publishing this evidence. They could lose positions, tenure, and even employment.  

<ref>Ruloff ... said he knew researchers, whom he would not name, who had studied cellular mechanisms and made findings “riddled with metaphysical implications” and suggestive of an intelligent designer. But they are afraid to report them, he said. [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/science/27expelled.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1] </ref> This is a serious risk for scholars who (unlike) Galileo are not independently wealthy.  

<ref>Ruloff ... said he knew researchers, whom he would not name, who had studied cellular mechanisms and made findings “riddled with metaphysical implications” and suggestive of an intelligent designer. But they are afraid to report them, he said. [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/science/27expelled.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1] </ref> This is a serious risk for scholars who (unlike) Galileo are not independently wealthy.

==References==

==References==