OrangePhilosophy

Thanks for the pointer. Looks good. Already I learned something. There is a paper on there dedicated to dispelling myths about Galileo. http://www.galilean-library.org/myths.html

The first one pointed out is whether or not the church acted wisely (in the scientific sense) when they rejected his claims to Copernicanism. I remember always reading that he brought no real direct proof and that he had some to offer, but did not. Guess I should read more.

Yes, I've discussed that issue with the guy who runs the site. He says there are two major myths about Galileo. The more popular one is that he was a martyr for science against anti-science religious bigots, when the reality is that the church authorities were just stuck in their scientific paradigm (though they did have religious motivations too).

The less popular myth, one perpetuated by some Catholic apologists, is that Galileo didn't have reasonable evidence for his view yet, and the church just wanted him to wait until he did. He did have very good arguments, no worse than we do for most scientific theses.

Both sides turn out to be at fault in some ways in terms of how they related to each other, but Galileo did have enough support for his views. It's just that the currently reigning paradigm for explanation of movement of heavenly bodies was held very tightly, and not just for reasons of religious authority.