Some Catholics Still Say Galileo Was Wrong

Read the comment policy

Showing 3 of 66 comments

Since nobody else has mentioned it... this is one of those things that everybody gets wrong, like "everybody used to believe the earth was flat".  In fact, it's all a question of frames of reference. You can't flatly say the sun does not revolve around the earth; from the frame of reference of a person standing on the surface of the earth (which we now understand to be non-Newtonian, obviously), the sun does revolve around him, and all the other planets describe ornate epicycles around him. The obviousness of this is the reason for its universal adoption until the Copernican model penetrates any particular human society. And if you collect enough people standing on the surface of the earth, it all averages out to approximate the heavenly bodies all revolving around the earth, for all practical purposes. If you doubt this, consider that the astronomers can still calculate the planets' motions to astounding precision based on those complex epicycles around the earth.  On the other hand, if you want a Newtonian frame of reference, you have to have everything revolve around the sun (or more accurately the center of gravity of the solar system, which is within the sun but not quite its center). It's no more true or accurate than any other frame of reference; it's an axiom of physics that there is no favored frame of reference, whether it has the earth as its center or the sun;  but it does make the math much simpler, and makes the understanding of gravity a hell of a lot more obvious, thereby permitting some progress in scientific understanding. (And even that is an approximation; the sun itself is revolving around the center of the galaxy, necessitating a non-Newtonian term to the heliocentric frame of reference; and the galaxy is going off in who knows what directions, etc.) The error would be to state that the sun revolves around the earth in a Newtonian frame of reference; but this was not the specific issue at the time, Newton being born a hundred years later and all. In fact, the big question involved here is a matter of philosophy, not geometry; is the earth, humanity, and specifically the Vatican the literal center and the "true" frame of reference of creation; and if not, can it still be the symbolic center of creation, with the entire purpose of creation being the earth, humanity, and the Catholic Church? You can see why the Church would be biased on these questions. Galileo's math leads inexorably to the current concept that there is no favored frame of reference, and the earth and all its contents being just a bunch of contaminants on a tiny speck in the far edges of one particular galaxy out of many, which does tend to undermine the axiomatic nature of the Church's special status and power derived directly from God.  And from there to Darwin, with a similar resistance to the further deflation of the special status of the earth, humanity, and the Church; is God likely to make a mutant chimp His Crown of Creation? And have His Son appear in that guise as Messiah and Savior? It really doesn't undermine the truth of religion so much as to undermine the hubris, stupidity, and hierarchical authority of organized religion. Is it likely that the Pope and the Cardinals are God's confidants and lieutenants,  if you accept that they are, as described above, souped up apes on a nondescript dirtball in the middle of a very large nowhere? On the other hand, if you are willing to accept humility and mystery and a religion that speaks to you personally and requires a lot of thinking to get any kind of answers, then it's not any problem at all.

"False information leads to false ideas, and false ideas lead to illicit and immoral actions—thus the state of the world today" - thank you, Robert Sangeris, i couldn't have put it better. So please follow your own thesis and immediatly SHUT THE FUCK UP!

A SUPERB REPLY TO THIS ARTICLE BY DR. ROBERT SUNGENIS WHO IS CITED IN THE ARTICLE CAN BE FOUND AT WWW.GALILEOWASWRONG.COM.