26% of Americans Believe The Sun Revolves Around the Earth (1 Viewer)

[Ilov80s]

Imagine a kid is running around the outside of a house. Is the answer to which object is moving (house or kid) dependent on the "perspective"?

It is, actually**, but that fact doesn't help whoever blew the poll question so vividly. Maurile's point about acceleration stands.

** from the perspective of, say, an imaginary sentient bacterium that's hitching a ride on the surface of the running kid's skin. The bacterium knows IT'S not moving, so it observes the house moving around it. But once a gust if wind blows that bacterium up in the air a ways, it can look down and see what's going on.

Bacterium is equivalent to man on earth?

 

[Doug B]

Bacterium is equivalent to man on earth?

Sure, in the analogy. But more specifically -- to man on earth before astronomy became a mature science.

 

[Ilov80s]

Bacterium is equivalent to man on earth?

Sure, in the analogy. But more specifically -- to man on earth before astronomy became a mature science.

Yeah, missed part of your last post about "knowing" it isn't moving.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

...For those that haven’t yet made an acquaintance with the campy joys of IML!, a new bit of viral content offers an appropriately outré entrée. Tape of a recent segment of the show surfaced on the Internet earlier this week, in which a standard consideration of the color palettes of a line of cardigans suddenly shifts into a disquisition on the astrophysical nature of the moon. Specially, Killinger and Mizrahi wish to determine if the moon is a planet or a star—forgetting the incidentally correct option that it is, you know, a moon.

Don’t ask questions, just watch:
Here are my favorite three lines, presented without attribution to enhance the poetry:
“The moon is a planet, darling … the moon is such a planet.”

“There was Uranus and there was Saturn and there was the one with the rings on it … alright here look, this is key lime.”

“The moon is what? The moon is a natural satellite? What’s that mean? Is that what Google said? No, I don’t like that at all.”

Please also note how the camera can’t even face the hosts once the discussion begins, and then, once it does, how the model on the back right must cover her mouth or risk breaking that cool becardiganed gaze. All this goes to show that although Mizrahi and QVC might well try to sell you the moon, that doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll market it accurately—better take a look at that return policy first....

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/01/16/isaac_mizrahi_s_moon_qvc_clip_is_the_campiest_thing_ever_video.html

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trending-now/isaac-mizrahi-and-qvc-host-debate-about-the-moon-being-a-planet-184918192.html

Video embedded.

 

[Ilov80s]

I feel bad for Yahoo, they are real good too. I just don't use them.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Interesting blog post here about how it's a huge oversimplification to think that Galileo was the rational one in the geocentrism-heliocentrism debates of his time.

 

[Mr. Retukes]

Interesting blog post here about how it's a huge oversimplification to think that Galileo was the rational one in the geocentrism-heliocentrism debates of his time.

But isn't that true about most historical figures? They all had blind spots. Founding fathers owned slaves, et., al.

 

[Binky The Doormat]

And thos epeople vote.

 

[matuski]

Interesting blog post here about how it's a huge oversimplification to think that Galileo was the rational one in the geocentrism-heliocentrism debates of his time.

The comments at the bottom quickly take this well above my pay grade.

So am I to adjust my understanding here? Did or did not the church repress the knowledge that we are/were not the center of the universe? Or is the point that while perhaps being right, Galileo could not support it properly at the time?

 

[cstu]

Interesting blog post here about how it's a huge oversimplification to think that Galileo was the rational one in the geocentrism-heliocentrism debates of his time.

The comments at the bottom quickly take this well above my pay grade.

So am I to adjust my understanding here? Did or did not the church repress the knowledge that we are/were not the center of the universe? Or is the point that while perhaps being right, Galileo could not support it properly at the time?

There was a guy named Democritis who was laughed at by Aristotle because he couldn't support his ideas about atoms, genetics, and evolution. Aristotle had a nice, simple theories, like fire/earth/water/air, that people could easily accept and understand, which they did for 2000 years.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Interesting blog post here about how it's a huge oversimplification to think that Galileo was the rational one in the geocentrism-heliocentrism debates of his time.

The comments at the bottom quickly take this well above my pay grade.

So am I to adjust my understanding here? Did or did not the church repress the knowledge that we are/were not the center of the universe? Or is the point that while perhaps being right, Galileo could not support it properly at the time?

It's both. The Church persecuted and censored Galileo, but (the author argues) that was more of a personal thing than any kind of broad cover-up of pro-heliocentric evidence. Galileo drew theological conclusions from his heliocentric idea, which the Church didn't like. Galileo also basically called the Pope an idiot in writing, which the Church also didn't like. But there were other people advancing heliocentric ideas at the time in a non-theological way (and without calling the Pope an idiot) and the Church was supportive of their efforts.

And yes, Galileo got the right answer, but many of his supporting arguments were completely invalid.

 

[cstu]

Interesting blog post here about how it's a huge oversimplification to think that Galileo was the rational one in the geocentrism-heliocentrism debates of his time.

The comments at the bottom quickly take this well above my pay grade.

So am I to adjust my understanding here? Did or did not the church repress the knowledge that we are/were not the center of the universe? Or is the point that while perhaps being right, Galileo could not support it properly at the time?

It's both. The Church persecuted and censored Galileo, but (the author argues) that was more of a personal thing than any kind of broad cover-up of pro-heliocentric evidence. Galileo drew theological conclusions from his heliocentric idea, which the Church didn't like. Galileo also basically called the Pope an idiot in writing, which the Church also didn't like. But there were other people advancing heliocentric ideas at the time in a non-theological way (and without calling the Pope an idiot) and the Church was supportive of their efforts.

And yes, Galileo got the right answer, but many of his supporting arguments were completely invalid.

That's like Mobil supporting people advancing environmental ideas as long as they don't call them polluters.

The Church was smart enough to realize they couldn't stop scientific research but could have it done on their terms. That allowed them to still push their geocentric model for another 200 years after Galileo before quietly dropping it.

 

[jon_mx]

Interesting blog post here about how it's a huge oversimplification to think that Galileo was the rational one in the geocentrism-heliocentrism debates of his time.

The comments at the bottom quickly take this well above my pay grade.

So am I to adjust my understanding here? Did or did not the church repress the knowledge that we are/were not the center of the universe? Or is the point that while perhaps being right, Galileo could not support it properly at the time?

It's both. The Church persecuted and censored Galileo, but (the author argues) that was more of a personal thing than any kind of broad cover-up of pro-heliocentric evidence. Galileo drew theological conclusions from his heliocentric idea, which the Church didn't like. Galileo also basically called the Pope an idiot in writing, which the Church also didn't like. But there were other people advancing heliocentric ideas at the time in a non-theological way (and without calling the Pope an idiot) and the Church was supportive of their efforts.

And yes, Galileo got the right answer, but many of his supporting arguments were completely invalid.

That's like Mobil supporting people advancing environmental ideas as long as they don't call them polluters.

The Church was smart enough to realize they couldn't stop scientific research but could have it done on their terms. That allowed them to still push their geocentric model for another 200 years after Galileo before quietly dropping it.

I guess that is better than you comparing American soldiers to Nazis.