Re: Top three reasons for optimism about the ID scam

On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 11:14:25 -0600, RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
wrote:

On 12/10/2024 1:31 AM, Martin Harran wrote:

You seem to have abandoned Salza and turned to your own reading of
Church documents.
 
Here is a simple challenge for you. The Galileo affair has been
extensively studied; find one recognised historian - just one - who
agrees with you that heliocentrism was really a heresy and not just a
trumped-up charge as I described it.
 
 
Point of Order:
============
You claim a couple of times above that the New Advent article has been
changed. It hasn't. The content on New Advent is not subject to
editing like Wikipedia; it is a copy of the Catholic  Encyclopedia
exactly as it was published between 1907 and 1912 with volume 6
containing the Galileo article published in 1907.

In regard to your continuing insistence that there have been changes
to my source, why don't you use the Wayback machine to show what has
changed? You can't because it hasn't changed, it's exactly as it was
published in 1907. You simply imagine stuff and convince yourself it
is true.

 

>
You just snipped it all out and ran.  What I put up supported the source
that is claimed to be Salza.  Your own source that you put up to
Burkhard and not to me last time seems to have changed to support Salza.
 The Anti geocentric catholic site that I put up supports Salza. 

So you can't find a single qualified historian to back you up, not
even one.

That should really, really give you food for thought but you have a
long record of not being able to get rid of your pet theories no
matter how ridiculous they make you look.


[snip stuff that doesn't improve with regurgitation.]