Why Galileo was Wrong, Even Though He was Right

Darwin's God ^ | 03/07/2010 | Cornelius Hunter

[UCANSEE2]

You know, you hit on the most valuable piece of information in the conflict between Science and Religion.

Science is ... agnostic,

I believe that it is, and that scientists themselves can choose to be whatever they want, and still do the math.

[messierhunter]

I’ve seen multiple references and articles over the past few years, regarding a cosmological model attributed to astrophysicist Dr. George Ellis, of a semi-geocentric universe containing a naked singularity as a recycling mechanism, a model that does not require mysterious “dark matter,” messierhunter. It would seem your objections are not entirely valid.

A) You did not address my objection that a geocentric universe requires explicitly referencing distant masses to derive its physics (ie, no other way to explain geocentric satellites).

B) There are models of the non-geocentric universe that do not require dark matter (MOND, Nonsymmetric Gravitational Theory, etc).

C) Dark matter is not explicitly referenced in our physical laws or equations (ie, you don't need to reference dark matter to compute the orbits of geocentric satellites and even MOND would be irrelevant).

[UCANSEE2]

As such it's not science, despite the widespread derision of anyone in science who dared to question the so-called "consensus" up to, what, last year, when the whole charade began to publicly fall apart, due to a few brave souls within the "climate change" apparatus beginning to surreptitiously release internal communications detailing the scale of the fraud, perpetrated via ommission and/or manipulation of data?

And that's just what they've done lately. Imagine what they did back when they could get away with it easier.

[hopespringseternal]

I am neither a catholic nor a fan of catholicism.

But all the caterwauling over Galileo and suppression of science by catholicism is rather ironic given that for approximately a thousand years it was largely the catholic church that preserved and advanced science.

Sure they suppressed some science because it was religiously unorthodox, but at least they have the excuse that religion was the primary focus and the whole science thing was just a lucrative diversion.

The secular priesthood of science we have today has no such excuse.