🚀 go-pugleaf

Chris Krolczyk writes, in reply to Edward Harbin,

>>which is not to say he [Galileo] had no problems with the religious establishment
>>of his day.
>
>The "religious establishment" of his day (i.e.,the Roman Catholic church)
>forced him to recant due to findings on his part which contradicted their
>interpretation of the bible and its interpretation of how the universe
>worked. So much for Christian thought's unwavering support of scientific
>innovation....

Come on, Chris, it would be great to have a reasonable discussion
about this, and we'll have a much better chance of doing so if you
at least speak to what Edward is saying and not some caricature of 
his position.  In the quote above he at least implied a difference
between a Christian worldview and the actions of the religious
establishment.  You should at least address that point and not just
assume it doesn't exist, by equating "Christian thought" with the
actions of Galileo's persecutors.

>>>society contribute to science?  Especially things that tend to throw doubt
>>>on religious teaching (e.g., evolution, cosmology, dendrochronology).
>>
>>Most Christians have trouble with none of the above.
>
>Oh,_please_! You've _never_ seen any attacks on evolutionary theory from
>Christians?

Here you go again.  Edward's point was valid (at least that's so here
in Australia).  And I'm sure he has seen those attacks.  That wasn't
the point he was making.  He used the word "Most".  There are as many
shades of opinion in Christianity as in any body of belief, including
atheism.  Trotting out only the far-out elements as though they
represent the whole doesn't help your position at all.

Cheers,  Mike.

--------------------------------------------------------
Mike Hore        Internet:    mikeh@kralizec.zeta.org.au