23 Apr '11 22:15>
Originally posted by 667joeWas he threatened? Is there actual evidence for this?
The threat of torture is a form of torture!
Originally posted by AgergImpressive art work.
But are they even a 'good idea' (as opposed to perfect or optimal)? It seems to me, in a design sense, as good an idea as packing a bridge with dynamite with the assumption it will never detonate.
I've got a couple of menacing looking wisdom teeth having a mosey around my mouth right now - and if they elect to get a better view, the little bastids are going ...[text shortened]...
.|````````|._/
`\``./\```//
`.|..|`|``|.\
``\_/`.\_/```
````````````````
🙁
Originally posted by Conrau KYes he was indeed and very directly. While being questioned in the Vatican he was reminded that if his answers were evasive then he might be questioned under torture, as was the practice in those holy times. This was at the time of the counter - reformation when the vatican was under political pressure to get tough.
Was he threatened? Is there actual evidence for this?
Originally posted by finneganYes he was indeed and very directly. While being questioned in the Vatican he was reminded that if his answers were evasive then he might be questioned under torture, as was the practice in those holy times.
Yes he was indeed and very directly. While being questioned in the Vatican he was reminded that if his answers were evasive then he might be questioned under torture, as was the practice in those holy times. This was at the time of the counter - reformation when the vatican was under political pressure to get tough.
For academic sources I would have to seller not so far back. This describes the Kafkaesque trial procedures very well and vividly.
Originally posted by Conrau KYou seem a bit stuck up and rather impressed with yourself. You are clearly lowering yourself when you indulge in these uneducated threads! My guess is you are here because the more learned circles have blackballed you and you have no where else to go.
[b]Yes he was indeed and very directly. While being questioned in the Vatican he was reminded that if his answers were evasive then he might be questioned under torture, as was the practice in those holy times.
Just to be clear, it isn't strictly speaking the Vatican which would have threatened him. The Vatican state did not exist yet. Certainly the ...[text shortened]...
I will happily read primary sources. Curial Latin is one of my favorites of leisurely reading.[/b]
Originally posted by RJHindsi don't like him either. except i admit he is a pretty good scientist. and his books are much more well written than his discovery channel mockumentaries. the god delusion in my view is simply a series of proofs which all lead to the idea that god is not necessary for this universe to work. not that god isn't real. my view as a theist is that there is a god, and he designed the universe so well, it takes care of itself. however i cannot prove this view and therefore it has no place in scientifical debates
It is a bunch of garbage put out there to make money off
the gullible. In my opinion Dawkins is a degenerate.
Originally posted by Conrau Ksure. giordano bruno was burnt to the stake for refusing to rescind his claims. galileo was asked nicely to stop with the false rumors that upset god. because the church is that kind
[b]and galileo "admitted" under threats of torture by the church that his work on astronomy is wrong.
No. That is completely false. Galileo was never tortured and it was not Galileo's astronomy that was strictly contentious but his claim that it conflicted with Scripture.[/b]
Originally posted by Zahlanzisure. giordano bruno was burnt to the stake for refusing to rescind his claims. galileo was asked nicely to stop with the false rumors that upset god. because the church is that kind.
sure. giordano bruno was burnt to the stake for refusing to rescind his claims. galileo was asked nicely to stop with the false rumors that upset god. because the church is that kind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Controversy_over_comets_and_The_Assayer
By 1616 the attacks on the ideas of Copernicus had reached a head, and Galileo w ...[text shortened]... cation of any of his works was forbidden, including any he might write in the future.[52]
Originally posted by Conrau KThe following is from an article that points to it. The website is run by The Catholic Education Resource Center and was written by Catholic apologist PATRICK MADRID.
[b]sure. giordano bruno was burnt to the stake for refusing to rescind his claims. galileo was asked nicely to stop with the false rumors that upset god. because the church is that kind.
Bruno certainly was burnt at the stake. I do not deny that. I am just unaware of any evidence that Galileo himself was tortured or that he was threatened with tor and harassment too. All I am questioning is how plausible the threat of physical torture was.[/b]
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/science/sc0033.html
But what about torture? While it's true that a decree issued by Pope Urban VIII instructed that Galileo "should be questioned as to his intentions and that he should be menaced with torture," no torture was ever carried out.
Originally posted by Conrau Kconrau, we are talking about the catholic church here. he was charged with heresy, the penalty for which was not anything pleasant. (burn at the stake in order to be purified). why do you need an official record to say "I, cardinal sparky, hereby formally threaten galileo with pointy sharp objects".
[b]sure. giordano bruno was burnt to the stake for refusing to rescind his claims. galileo was asked nicely to stop with the false rumors that upset god. because the church is that kind.
Bruno certainly was burnt at the stake. I do not deny that. I am just unaware of any evidence that Galileo himself was tortured or that he was threatened with tor ...[text shortened]... and harassment too. All I am questioning is how plausible the threat of physical torture was.[/b]