Re: Fred Hoyle's `Mathematics of Evolution'
Chris Cogan (ccogan@sfo.com)
Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:49:23 -0800> [...]
>
> >SJ>> In the sixteenth century, Copernicus' co-worker, Domenico da
> >>Novara, held that no system so cumbersome and inaccurate as the
> >>Ptolemaic had become could possibly be true nature. And Copernicus
> >>himself wrote in the Preface to the De Revolutionibus that the
astronomical
> >>tradition he inherited had finally created a monster.'
> >>
> >>However, so ingrained was the idea that the Earth was the centre of the
> >>universe that hardly anyone, even those astronomers who were well aware
> >>of the growing unreality of the whole system, ever bothered to consider
an
> >>alternative theory."
> >>
> >>(Denton M.J., "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis", 1985, p349)
>
> SB>There was also the problem that you could be burned at the stake for
> >considering an alternative theory.
>
> The fact is, as Koestler points out, that only *two* scientists were ever
> burnt at the stake by the Church, and only one (Bruno) was by the Catholic
> Church, and both were executed not for their scientific opinions, but
their
> religious opinions:
Chris
Hmmm. I wonder why *more* were not burned. Could it be that they dared not
express their opinions for fear of what would happen? Why did Kepler (or was
it someone else?) have to publish his work as mere speculation rather than
science? Perhaps he feared reprisals (at the very least) from ye olde
defenders of the faith?