Why are the skeptics here?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Has he really passed away or is he caught under a mountain of academic work?

A serious question.

Has Terri Shiavo really passed away, or do you still have hopes that she will rise again, perhaps at Easter?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Has Terri Shiavo really passed away, or do you still have hopes that she will rise again, perhaps at Easter?

She will rise again. Easter is unlikely, though.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Has he really passed away or is he caught under a mountain of academic work?

A serious question.

He reneged on his committment to judge the Great Debate without explanation, so as far as I'm concerned, the only explanation is that he has perished and gone home to Jesus.

Originally posted by no1marauder
LMFAO!!! Let's see; why aren't there many writings in Europe in the 1600's by astronomers supporting the heliocentric theory? Take a wild guess, idiot.

Why don't you enlighten us?

EDIT: You're just trying to distract from the fact that Galileo simply couldn't scientifically prove his theory.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Why don't you tell me?

Maybe because of the "heresy being burned at the stake or imprisoned for life" thingy? Perhaps because of the writings of heliocentric authors being banned thingy?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Maybe because of the "heresy being burned at the stake or imprisoned for life" thingy?

Wrong.

Here's a clue: Martin Luther dies in 1546. John Calvin dies in 1564. Galileo's trial isn't until 1615.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Wrong.

Here's a clue: Martin Luther dies in 1546. John Calvin dies in 1564. Galileo's trial isn't until 1615.

And Galilleo went to prison in 1632. So what? The RCC still held dominance over most of Europe.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Who cares if he could scientifically prove his theory using 1600's technology? That's a ridiculous red herring. The point is he was not even allowed to teach or write about his theories because they were declared heresy by your moronic Church.

It's not a red herring because, if Galileo could have proven his theories, there wouldn't have been a trial in the first place*. If he could not prove his theories then, as a scientist, to assert that his position must be accepted as definitively true by all and sundry was just intellectual dishonesty. If he could not prove his theories, then he had no factual basis on which to pressure the Church to interpret the Scripture in a particular way as he did (which, of course, is precisely what the term "meddling in theology/Scripture" refers to).

* Look up the comments of Cardinal Bellarmine (the head of the Roman Inquisition) on the issue.

Originally posted by no1marauder
And Galilleo went to prison in 1632. So what? The RCC still held dominance over most of Europe.

Not in Germany, Switzerland, Hungary, England, Scotland, parts of France, the Benelux and Scandinavia.

Care to try again?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
It's not a red herring because, if Galileo could have proven his theories, there wouldn't have been a trial in the first place*. If he could not prove his theories then, as a scientist, to assert that his position must be accepted as definitively true by all and sundry was just intellectual dishonesty. If he could not prove his theories, then h ...[text shortened]... ook up the comments of Cardinal Bellarmine (the head of the Roman Inquisition) on the issue.

Why is it that a scientist is not able to state his case as being true even if all the available evidence supports it (as it did in the case of the heliocentric model), but the church is allowed to assert it's position without any evidence whatsoever?