Talk:Galileo Galilei

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

We need to remove the liberal, anti-Catholic propaganda from this article. Galileo did not have a scientific dispute with the church. He did kick up a fuss with the way he presented his scientific findings. He also presented his own theological views.

Was he ever forced to recant the view that the planets revolve around the sun? If so, we need evidence for this. If not, we should not assert this.

Some of Galileo's discoveries went against Aristotle, an early Greek philosopher. This is certain. But how much support did Aristotle have in the Catholic Church? And was it political, ideological or theological support?

Did Galileo step on some toes, politically speaking? That is, did he antagonize or embarrass certain individuals?

Did Galileo make any theological pronouncements? Did he offer any novel Bible interpretations? Was he ever investigated for alleged heresy? --Ed Poor Talk 08:28, 17 December 2008 (EST)

See here for a close look at what was behind it all. A response here to that peer-reviewed paper is also worth reading. Philip J. Rayment 21:55, 18 December 2008 (EST)
he was rebuked by the cath chuirch. It wa st. Robert bellarmines official duty to present the bad news. A result was "at-the-time" unproven theorys were not heresy according to new rules in place. Galileo was cleared long before john paul I I . ---jpatt
Well, that's what I'm trying to figure out. Maybe we need a table listing each of Galileo's scientific findings (including his incorrect guess about tides). Each row could describe (1) the finding; (2) contemporary reaction to it among other scientists domestic and abroad, and what various church official said about it (at the time or later on); (3) the modern view: i.e., was he right or wrong in what he said? --Ed Poor Talk 09:30, 17 December 2008 (EST)
The main problem was that Galileo misrepresented the Church's position, and printed with an "imprimatur" without approval. It's analogous to a trademark violation today, or treason when it concerns a government at war (as was the case in Galileo's time).--aschlafly 09:34, 17 December 2008 (EST)
That might be one way of looking at it, but it's not as simple as that. He did have the Pope's permission to print, and permission to make some minor corrections first, but then printed something somewhat different to that which had been agreed. And even that is a simplistic summary. Philip J. Rayment 21:55, 18 December 2008 (EST)


I believe if there is a section called quotes in an article on Galileo it should be quotes from the man himself. Copying and pasting quotes from other articles on Galileo here is wrong. If these quotes are to be used they should be placed in context within the rest of article (and surrounded by quotation marks).--JohnD 08:45, 17 December 2008 (EST)

I agree. Please place them in context within the rest of the article. --Ed Poor Talk 08:51, 17 December 2008 (EST)
I'd rather not. I don't believe a good article is made by placing lots of direct quotation from other peoples work it. They should be used as references to back up any statements used in the article, but direct quotations are unnecessary. It is my opinion that this section should be removed.--JohnD 09:14, 17 December 2008 (EST)
I improved it, and you should feel free to improve further. Thanks.--aschlafly 09:02, 17 December 2008 (EST)

Bobbing and weaving

Let's work together on this. We need to quote others exactly. We also need to incorporate the insights of authors such as User:Aschlafly. What's the best way to do this? --Ed Poor Talk 09:41, 17 December 2008 (EST)

Ed, I'm fine with quoting others exactly but such quotations should a) be clearly labelled as such, with quotation marks and proper attribution. b) Be used appropriately. To me this means only using direct quotations if you are going to comment on what the person has said. In other cases, it is better to write the statement yourself and then reference the source you are using for your information.--JohnD 09:47, 17 December 2008 (EST)
We have several different ways of showing quotes, including at least three different templates (and very little interest in standardising them), and in addition Ed Poor has his own way: by using a bulleted paragraph. I don't know of anybody else who uses that format for quotes, and I consider it to be quite unclear (it took me a while to realise that), but that's what he's doing. Philip J. Rayment 21:58, 18 December 2008 (EST)
Sorry, forgot to respond to your second point. Could you point more directly to where User:Aschlafly has provided us with his insights? But in answer to your question I think the best way for us to incorporate them would be for him to edit the article directly. That would avoid any confusion or misinterpretation.--JohnD 09:53, 17 December 2008 (EST)
Please see above. The "crime" by Galileo was more of a trademark violation or treason, as he published a theory without the Catholic Church's approval while claiming its imprimatur. Galileo was, by the way, never condemned after the trial and the Protestant position on the topic was even more against Galileo than the Catholic position. Keep in mind that they were at war at the time.--aschlafly 10:20, 17 December 2008 (EST)
Okay, I've tried to make that clear in the notable facts section.--JohnD 10:22, 17 December 2008 (EST)