TIMESTAMPS: Part One: Context | 1:46 Part Two: Galileo's Justification | 4:14 Part Three: Galileo's "Warning" | 6:54 Part Four: The Dialogue | 9:05 Part Five: The Trial | 11:05 Part Six: The Sentence | 15:03 Conclusion | 17:06

@tedphillips2501

4 жыл бұрын

Is your left eye becoming a lazy eye ? Also, you are missing the theological explanation for why the Earth, as a fallen entity, was at the center, the drain down which all vile things went, of the universe. You are not getting a good education at Cambridge.

@gfxpimp

4 жыл бұрын

@@tedphillips2501 Ah, yes. Anything that is definitively proved false, suddenly becomes metaphorical. Anything that is unknown or unknowable, we are free to claim is true.... until we are forced to call it metaphorical.

@bengreen171

4 жыл бұрын

@@tedphillips2501 ....I think he's at Oxford - which is as irrelevant as your explanation of the theological view of geocentrism. The important fact is, as CS says, that the Church was wrong, and they silenced honest scientific study, rather than admit they were fallible.

@oliverhug3

4 жыл бұрын

Ted Phillips , Earth is a fallen entity ⁉️

@joelhenderson3723

4 жыл бұрын

I've been watching your videos for quite a while now, and finally subscribed a couple weeks ago. I'm always impressed by the level of information presented, and your honest effort to treat topics seriously- not just as a political hackjob. So Thanks for all the content, and I hope to keep seeing it for years to come.

who else wouldnt mind more cosmic-historian vids???

@dawnelizabeth1828

4 жыл бұрын

I'd love that myself, thanks.

@blackatheist7369

4 жыл бұрын

I wouldn’t mind .In fact I will LOVE to see more

@michaelmagdy6647

4 жыл бұрын

@@blackatheist7369 I had the intuition to click on that *see more* . Not one of my proud moments.

@anthonynorman7545

4 жыл бұрын

@宇宙不思議な try Crash Course, Extra Credits or Overly Sarcastic Productions Some quality content

@sovietbot6708

4 жыл бұрын

I would love that. I love history

Honestly, you should do more science history videos like this one

@kylekazimir2813

3 жыл бұрын

agreed

@Siska0Robert

3 жыл бұрын

The story of Hypatia is fascinating as well.

@Alnivol666

Жыл бұрын

No...he shouldn't. He is not a historian and it shows to anybody who has a basic grasp of the subjects he is talking about. He is way out of his depth. Too bad the damage he is doing will never get fixed.

@purugigi

Жыл бұрын

@@Alnivol666 , how so?

@LittleLionHaw

8 ай бұрын

​@@Alnivol666yes I am also interested in what specifically in this video you take issue with? If there are inaccuracies then I'd genuinely like to know

I love how when Stephen Hawking first visited the vatican, his first with was to see the manuscripts of galileo.... whadda bad ass

@____________________drunk1737

4 жыл бұрын

wait really

@wolfthequarrelsome504

4 жыл бұрын

He got some shock when he found out that the general Galileo story was a lie.

@MrWig100

2 жыл бұрын

@@wolfthequarrelsome504 More of a myth than a lie. Though it is argued that a myth is a lie.

@karlazeen

2 жыл бұрын

What was the newly discovered story?

Galileo: The original "Facts don't care about your feelings"!

@michaeljones1686

4 жыл бұрын

Galileo destroys the catholic church with facts and logic

@Ixnatifual

4 жыл бұрын

I would subscribe to Galileo’s channel despite the sensationalist way he titles his videos.

@xsuploader

4 жыл бұрын

its funny you mention something shapiro said. Shapiro would probably try to argue that the church are responsible for galileos achievements.

@michaeljones1686

4 жыл бұрын

I don't think he would, Ben Shapiro is usually reasonable.

@averageenjoyer4048

4 жыл бұрын

@Michael Jones 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣🤣🤣🤣😂🤣😂

Thank you for this. I learned a lot.

@MsDjessa

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah I find this very useful. You see a cleaned up version was once offered to me in a KZread comment section by an apologist. Who seemed to have bought the official church version. Like CS said, the church would still look bad. The apologist gave me a link to a modern article written by the church. Here's the kicker, it was written by Ratzinger. Now I know this is a bit poisoning the well but I don't trust a guy who we know have been involved with hiding the child abuse of the church. And that being said, considering what the church does now, I doubt it was any more honest in the past.

@enkh-erdenebatbold1177

2 жыл бұрын

More weight

@everyzylrian

Жыл бұрын

This video was complete historical garbage. It was laughable, and if you could commit a crime against education and scientific learning, this would be it. Alex fabricated or misrepresented everything, including the whole scenario involving the Church fabricating evidence against Galileo (which is quite ironic). Tim ONeill completely destroyed this patent garbage of a video. Look up his blog History for Atheists - note Tim is an atheist himself.

@danieleyre8913

Жыл бұрын

You learned nothing valid. This video is appallingly poor in terms of historical accuracy and analysis.

"thunderbolts and lightings very very frighten me" Galileo

@00camttam

4 жыл бұрын

Galileo!!!! (Sorry for this other dude... nobody knows who invited him!)

@istvanszennai5209

4 жыл бұрын

isn’t it ironic that the cross on the top of the church is likely to attract lightning? :F

@vegannonextreme5318

4 жыл бұрын

Zatchooze Naut let him go

@Acoolakim007

4 жыл бұрын

He's just a poor boy from a poor family. Spare him his life from this monstrosity.

@vegannonextreme5318

4 жыл бұрын

TapIntoTheEssence mama ooooooo sometimes I wish I never been born at aaaaaaallllll

The most remarkable fact is that the catholic church formally apologized but not until about 30 years ago: “The question of Galileo’s heresy, however, remained open until 1992. After three centuries, Pope John Paul II formally acknowledged that Galileo had been wrongfully condemned, and that his judges had erred in insisting upon the literal reading of Holy Scripture as the way to understand the physical world.” Burton The History of Mathematics page 347

@alienufoweird

4 жыл бұрын

They had to as to not lose followers but that doesn't change the fact that today they still brainwash people and hide pedophile priests all over the world.

@johnnotrealname8168

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah I am not so sure.

@boothvrstudio

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for pointing this fact out.

@cotaryan3740

4 жыл бұрын

alienufoweird you left out they also feed, cloth, and shelter more people around the world than any other institution

@strangething4322

4 жыл бұрын

@@cotaryan3740 sauce?

Could we have a video about Salem witch trials? This is also very interesting.

@PassionPno

3 жыл бұрын

Yes please!

@acupanraphaelgio7925

3 жыл бұрын

Yes please!!

@seasonalsnap3846

2 жыл бұрын

Yes please!!!

@everyzylrian

Жыл бұрын

Not by Alex, everything in this video is either blatant lie or complete distortion of the historical events. Tim ONeill destroyed this piece pretty terribly

@generaltom6850

Ай бұрын

⁠@@everyzylrian Okay, tell me what exactly was “a blatant lie” or “distorted” and then you will be taken seriously.

Imagine how powerless he must've felt when even though he produced the original letter, they still went ahead and only took their forgery into account.

@martinstacey4301

Жыл бұрын

He did not produce an original letter. His letter was from Cardinal Bellarmine, head of the Inquisition, stating that Galileo was a good Catholic who wasn't in trouble with the authorities and had been informed of the injunction to not defend heliocentricity. What the Inquisition produced was a memo stating that Galileo had been issued a private injunction to not teach, hold or defend the Copernican system in any way, or something to that effect. They were separate documents. Skeptic gets a crucial part of the story wrong. I've read two autobiographies of Galileo and a biographical account of his journeys to Rome written by leading scholars and none say that the memo was forged. He might have gotten away with his book by promising to rewrite it correctly, but disobeying an injunction and deceiving a powerful man like the Pope, who went ballistic when he heard about it, was a different thing altogether. That's what finished him off.

An omitted detail: Galileo represented the RCC's view with a character he named Simplicio (dummy).

@bitcoinweasel9274

4 жыл бұрын

Galileo wasn't quite that blunt, It's a little more nuanced that that. From wikipedia: Simplicio, a dedicated follower of Ptolemy and Aristotle, presents the traditional views and the arguments against the Copernican position. He is supposedly named after Simplicius of Cilicia, a sixth-century commentator on Aristotle, but it was suspected the name was a double entendre, as the Italian for "simple" (as in "simple minded") is "semplice".[8] Simplicio is modeled on two contemporary conservative philosophers, Lodovico delle Colombe (1565-1616?), Galileo's opponent, and Cesare Cremonini (1550-1631), a Paduan colleague who had refused to look through the telescope. Still worth noting that maybe Galileo would've faired better if he wasn't quite so damned clever.

@jacovichstabs841

4 жыл бұрын

@@bitcoinweasel9274 Which just goes to show the brutality of religious dogma, that it punishes the virtue of being clever.

@akizeta

4 жыл бұрын

"Clever" has two meanings, after all: firstly, the opposite of simple, and second, being duplicitous or manipulative. It's best to be only as clever as you need to be, and not _too_ clever.

@johnnotrealname8168

4 жыл бұрын

@@jacovichstabs841 No it does not.

@wolfthequarrelsome504

4 жыл бұрын

I can now spot a bigot at 500 yards by the use if their calling card....RCC.

Climate change “skeptics” when consensus is mentioned be like: “But Galileo tho”

@purugigi

4 жыл бұрын

longflopy dog , there is. People just don’t want to accept it,

@-dwaring285-3

4 жыл бұрын

longflopy dog oh so 99% of climate scientists agreeing that climate change is real isn’t consensus?

@joedoe3688

4 жыл бұрын

@@-dwaring285-3 99,97% of presented percentages on the internet are made up.

@bengreen171

4 жыл бұрын

@longflopy dog are you saying that climate scientists do not overwhelmingly agree that anthropic global warming is a thing? Because it would seem like you would need to provide some sort of evidence for that claim.

@NotGoodAtNamingThings

4 жыл бұрын

@longflopy dog - "Do your own research" doesn't mean "listen to KZread skeptics with no actual credentials."

Now, while a heretic and godless atheist myself, I must put a couple comments here, in quasi-defense of the inquisitors, as I too, as part of my philosophy and history of science curricula, had to deal with Galileo and his Dialog. 1. let's not forget that by that time, there was no scientific method yet and as such, the church's could not have been opposing the scientific method 2. the quote, that they prosecuted Galileo because he "was wrong" also does not imply that they were against scientific discovery per se - in a time where there was no scientific method yet, and facts about nature were understood to be one way of god revealing himself, they were more concerned about these discoveries controlled and overseen by the church (see how Aristotelian philosophy was implemented to theology, especially with Thomism - this effort was not done by proponents of heliocentrism) 3. Galileo, as mentioned above, did not really care to synthesize heliocentrism with theology or the edicts of the church. One could argue that as science was slowly born, contradictions as such were inevitable and attempts on mentioned synthesis became more and more futile. One could, however, not argue, that Galileo made the slightest attempts to do so; in fact, if any of you read 'Dialogo', you can see that arguing for heliocentrism is a mild statement - he was essentially ridiculing geocentrism. Galileo also, like an annoying celebrity these days, used his fame to propose his theories and incomplete mathematical workings, without mentioning the adequate criticism on them - criticism not just from the church. 4. as Alex mentioned, heliocentrism was not established by this time. In fact, the model faced serious challenges, and not just from the state (although some of the criticism of the inquisitors, such as they mentioning the problems with Galileo's scope, had merit): Tycho Brahe, Peter Crüger, Johann Locher, and other pointed out problems with heliocentrism, on scientific, not on religious basis - however, Galileo either did not adress those, or outright ridiculed them in 'Dialogo' (f.e. Locher's 'Disquisitions'). 5. in summary, yes, Galileo was prosecuted because he was opposing the church, and yes, he was an important and inspiring figure in the history of science. However, his opposition wasn't all scientific. In fact, a lot of his conduct would, by today's standard, count as pseudoscientific.

@players02

4 жыл бұрын

Interesting, what led you to dig into this?

@matswessling6600

Жыл бұрын

1. wrong. They where against that observation trumps doctrin, which is central to science (empirism) 2. you can't blane galileo for that the church dogma doesnt follow observation

@mikev4621

Жыл бұрын

Hadn't Bacon outlined scientific method by about this time?

@toonyandfriends1915

9 ай бұрын

@@matswessling6600 lmfao what a poor defence

@matswessling6600

9 ай бұрын

@@toonyandfriends1915laugh al you want. it wont make you right.

And here we are, sadly, several hundred years later and there are still people advocating that any scientific discovery should be dismissed if it contradicts their own literal interpretation of the Bible.

@mikelarrivee5115

2 жыл бұрын

I would agree, but swap out the word literal for materialistic and you've got it. I think interpreting the bible literally is important but a literal interpretation doesn't make sense if you are a materialist, just like most things won't and can't and will continue to become less and less sensible the longer you are a materialist for.

@Laotzu.Goldbug

2 жыл бұрын

And here we are, sadly, several hundred years later and there are still people advocating the any scientific discovery should be dismissed if it contradicts their own interpretation of Liberalism.

They hated Galileo because he spoke the truth.

@Random25.

4 жыл бұрын

Bro I see you on every video I watch

@vaibhavsati538

4 жыл бұрын

@@Random25. he's just some guy

@hexum7

4 жыл бұрын

I think they didn’t give two shits about the truth. Galileo represented a challenge to the church’s power. Which was based on the claim of infallibility None of them cared if the earth revolved around the ☀️ as long as the 🌎 revolved around the church

@ericalbers4867

4 жыл бұрын

He didn't speak the truth since at the time, heliocentrism wasn't fact. However what he says did call into question biblical scripture - and that is what for him in trouble and made made them mad. Anything that contradicts or questions scripture is attacked with every bit of apologetics and double talk they can conjure up. Honestly it makes me consider that there must be a god or some type. I have no idea where else they obtain their seemingly endless supply of bullshit from. It seems to outweigh even dark matter.

@ec6211

4 жыл бұрын

@Wade Haden - Master Jedi Engineer Goth It's actually a normal trait amongst people who are brainwashed to believe in something, beyond any doubt.

It's amazing how many people will try to defend the church in this one by implying that because the exaggerated version of events that persists in popular consciousness is wrong, that means what the church did is basically okay.

@johnnotrealname8168

4 жыл бұрын

They defended the Scientific Consensus of the day. Something Scientists do today (of course not as harsh).

@rc7625

4 жыл бұрын

@@johnnotrealname8168 Christ (pun intended lol), shut the fuck up already. You're annoying, dude. Get a life.

@Dutcheh

Жыл бұрын

Many of the brightest mathematicians and natural philosophers disagreed with galileo. They had the their “scientific method” of the time that worked to prove the geocentric model. The church was the entity that pushed and flourished science. During this period it was the 30 years war so it was very important to the Church that authority was not challenged improperly. Lives were literally at stake. Galileo was known to be ill tempered and when he published his work as scientific fact instead of opposing view he was in trouble. He also insulted the pope which in itself was troubling for his case. The church put him under houses arrest. Everything that happened is understandable in context. It’s like someone 30 years ago arguing that string theory is absolute fact and everyone is wrong. and then insulted the president/king etc. People would be upset.

"And yet, it moves." Brilliant video!

It's amazing how scripture can be so creatively reinterpreted.

@martiddy

4 жыл бұрын

That's why abrahamic religions are so famous

@Andre_XX

4 жыл бұрын

How convenient for some that ancient religious texts are so imprecise as to be open to interpretation.

@paragonofvirtue270

4 жыл бұрын

Martiddy - Sama : you stupid ignorant bitch .

@j.kilgore8664

4 жыл бұрын

40k prot. religions using the Catholic Bible, each with their own interpretation, each claiming they own the truth and everyone else is wrong. That's physically impossible and mathematically insane! The last person to talk to if you need a Bible scholar is an atheist. The bias is so strong you can choke on the stink of it.

@seekerandthinker

Жыл бұрын

And yet they say Bible is the truth, an objective truth that can be misinterpreted every few centuries

You know I was just thinking about this subject yesterday. Thanks for making this video.

A detailed and fascinating video. You've described the essence of the scientific method. I've subscribed to your podcasts and will donate.

:))!!! im rly glad u still upload. every video is a joy. thanks alex !!!! see you in the next one !!

I've been following you for a couple of years. I admire the fact you're studying Theology right now. You look at things on a factual basis. This time I subscribed.

Amazing video! Thank you for the time that you put into this project.

Informative, packed with facts. Saved to watch again. To much info to remember all the facts. Perfect.

Love your channel Alex! Keep up the great content! :)

Love the topic! Super interesting!

I have been dying to know about Galelio's trial since childhood.Many Thanks for presenting this topic. And Welcome Back!! We have been waiting for you.

Excellent video, love the format, easy to digest.

This was an absolutely outstanding video! Easily your best. Well done! Fascinating.

@danieleyre8913

Жыл бұрын

It is absolutely appalling. This Alex O'Conner either has either: 1) not done more than superficial research into the Galileo affair 2) grossly misunderstood the sources he read 3) deliberately sought a conclusion that suits him, and cherry picked and shoehorned "factoids" that lead to this conclusion.

More historical videos like this please!

Thank you for providing your sources!

Missed your videos, dude. Glad to see one again.

Hey, you, I also started studying theology (but as a Christian) and we had a discussion of atheist could also study theology! It was war! I brought up you, as an example of yes, you can study it, and another student had murder in his eyes! Fun!

@notyourbruh

4 жыл бұрын

Oof

@SearchIndex

2 жыл бұрын

I was raised as a strict devout Catholic but questioned everything and by the age of 30 was a hard boiled atheist …chemistry 101

Cosmic Skeptic, Alex. My how far you've come since I watched you choosing your channel name, taking us to work with you at the tea shop and the big 'alterboy' did by Swish! I'm still poor as dirt or I'd be not just one of your biggest fan, but supporter, too. Take care of yourself, you are destined to be even greater! We, our species needs you! Lol, I just, four days later, realized I'd put Comic instead of Cosmic! Oops! Blonde/senior moment, I guess! 👏😘💖☮️🎃

I loved the video!! Very well research. You have such a great way with words and facts ❤️

So glad I found your channel. Thank you for sharing your wisdom 🙏🏻

Thanks for a new perspective, and for some "food for thoughts"! Good luck with your degree!

*Congrats on 300K subs!* Been with your channel for a few years now and it's wonderful to see you discuss the controversial and importantly pressing issues that you now do.

@Wearephuct-O

4 жыл бұрын

Logic And 300K Subs Destroys Historical Fallacy Every Time

@LouisGedo

4 жыл бұрын

@@Wearephuct-O You first again? :)

@Wearephuct-O

4 жыл бұрын

@@LouisGedo You're first in my book

This channel has grown exponentially since I found it one year ago. Holy crap, give a round of applause for CosmicSkeptic!

Thank You for sharing this . I am now subscribed. Looking forward to much more

I still remember the time that i had to seriously argue against a person thay claimed the church did not attempt to silence Galileo.

@josiprakonca2185

4 жыл бұрын

And how it went?

@zanbarlee6190

4 жыл бұрын

@@josiprakonca2185 how it normally goes. I feel like i proved my point and that most people that heard the argument would say the same. But the person i argued against didnt really change their point of view and will probably try to argue the same thing later on to someone else.

@asdfghjk8876

3 жыл бұрын

Sure they tried to silence him, but if you knew the actual context, you’d say it was warranted. The vast majority of the science community would’ve silenced him because his arguments were either weak or wrong and didn’t do anything to convince neither the church not the scientists of heliocentrism. If you want to believe it or not, with the information they had at the time, geocentrism looked pretty plausible. Galileo didn’t prove that heliocentrism was right, so he had no business treating it as a fact. The pope allowed Galileo to write his dialogue, to present both worldviews but without favoring the one everyone deemed to be wrong. And still he did managed to let his bias permeate the book, whilst insulting the pope. There you have it, that’s why the church "silenced him".

@TheHikariLP

3 жыл бұрын

@@asdfghjk8876 I see you don't have a scientific profession and an attitude to be against free speech and to defend people of the past for their transgressions. The scientific community as a whole to this day hasn't silenced anyone. Sure, publishers refuse publications but you can still write your crackpot theories on your own website or book. There were lots of geocentrist scientists during that time but strangely they weren't the ones who silenced him. The most they ever did was write letters to the contrary. Listen buddy, the catholic church, that is the Vatican, publically apologised for this because they know they f*cked up, but for some reason people like you come along nowadays to justify the church and aren't satisfied with the fact that the church isn't perfect and justified on every level, not realising you make the situation worse for the church which just wants to get over it. You are lietrally making the situation worse for the church by defending it on it's past mistakes. Also that letter was a forgery, so no, the pope never put any limitations on him unless you think it's okay to sentence someone before they know their "rights"(more like threats here). Father to Mother: Suzy can't go outside else she will get spanked. Mother does not repeat it to her daughter Suzy. Suzy goes outside -> gets spanked. Epitome of justice. And yes, it is true silencing if you judge someone so they can't leave their house or write letters or books. I don't think you would feel like you can voice your opinion if someone in power orders you to never use the internet again or go out onto the streets. There is no need for the quotation marks. Face it, if you are in favor of free speech there is no way to justify this unjust sentencing. But at least the way you argue your point you at least prove that the church is against open inquirery and holds the idea that mere "insults against the pope" warant lifelong punishments. I am glad it lost almost all of its power. Lastly the actual sentencing was not because it was against scientific consensus at the time or insulted the pope but because the church saw it as going against holy scripture. It's unambiguously stated in the trial and sentencing.

@asdfghjk8876

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheHikariLP also, they didn’t just reject the model because it went against scripture. According to the sub, Tim O'Neill is a reliable source for this, so just check out his answers on quora around this subject for God’s sake, since I know reading a book would take too long. www.quora.com/What-is-the-most-misunderstood-historical-event/answer/Tim-ONeill-1?ch=99&share=7c162d3c&srid=uWLkO (he even cites his sources wow) The church was the patron of science, most scientists or "natural philosophers" at the time were churchmen. They didn’t shy away from changing their interpretation of scripture if they were wrong, so yes it was very much about the scientific consensus as well, it did play a role. The true violation was the reinterpretation of scripture by a non-expert tho, I give you that. But still, the basis of his trial was the violation of the agreement he made in 1616, not science

It does need to be pointed out that throughout all this, it's simply a given that the Church had authority to make these demands and enact punishments. This is what happens when you make your church and your government one and the same thing... and we can see that it is still the case now in Islamic theocracies.

@nathanielreid4967

4 жыл бұрын

You are so correct, this truth can't be expressed enough. This is one of the most evils to inflict the world church/religious and State unions. Where ever there is religious and state powers marriages, there is much oppressive evil. This is the main idea that has made USA so singularly unique, the separation of church and state.

@JamesLewis

4 жыл бұрын

@@nathanielreid4967 There are those in the US who are working very hard to change it's nature from the only country in the world ever to be founded on the basis of separation of religion and government, into a full blown theocracy. these people are a danger to the very existence of the US, certainly it's existence as a world power. IMO, of course.

@nathanielreid4967

4 жыл бұрын

@@JamesLewis The Greeks fell, after them the Great Roman empire fell and we are not willing to learn from them. The greatest lie is not we tell others but what we tell ourselves.

@davidsirmons

4 жыл бұрын

Yes! Exactly! Religious-based governing systems are the LAST thing the US needs. See Great Britain and Czarist Russia and Islam for details.

@JosephGonzalezPortela

4 жыл бұрын

Perhaps consider that any strong central government run by a small group of people is dangerous- whether it is religious or secular. Look at the communist regimes that were clearly not religious at all. The death tolls from Stalin and Mao make Hitler look like an amateur.

This is one of your best videos this year, in my opinion

Very well done, both in presentation and interpretation. Looking forward to more of the same.

The entire situation is like an operatic drama...

Thanks for this balanced summary, Alex! I'm glad St. John Paul II apologised on behalf of the church for this in 1992…even if the actual, real story is more nuanced than the version that gets shared around today.

Very informative video Alex!

Brilliant, love it and keep up the good work!

For the most part this is a very welcome video Alex! However, (and you may never see this) there are a few crucial things that you have not mentioned, or that are not correct. 1) The term 'scientist' was not invented until 1833. 'Natural philosopher' was the word used and it meant something different to scientist. 2) One of the main reasons Pope Urban was so angry (and this is key) was that Simplicio represented the Pope's views. This didn't help Galileo's case on a personal level, not to mention Galileo was known to be a temper boiling person and this was also the period of the 30 years war was omitted and that played another crucial role in this unique decision. 3) The scientific standard of that time was sought through books not observation and experimentation. This was an important part of the debate. I.e. how should science be done? 4) It wasn't just due to scripture that heliocentrism was denied, it was scripture plus for them common sense at the time plus even some scientific arguments. 5) It was not the church against science, as some of the church leaders themselves actually agreed with Galileo, although that aspect is largely hidden usually. 6) It is a bit misleading to define science in its (more) modern context, and then to impose that on the Galileo case. Science has not always meant what it does today and your case becomes a bit anachronistic when we look back at his book and characterize it as the "winning book" (even if it was). So to call it a 'science vs the church' episode is still quite misleading. It would be better to call it a debate within the church about how science should be done.

@bozoc2572

4 жыл бұрын

Yes! Very important nuances there. People are born today into the world where they get the idea of how scientific method ought to function, i.e. they way it is functioning right now. Based on that idea, they make all sorts of judgements and fail to understand the process that led up to this moment. This often leads to scientism.

@notamoron2246

4 жыл бұрын

Doesn't point 4 contradict point 1? By the way, isn't "science" for all intents and purposes simply the study of nature anyway?

@notamoron2246

4 жыл бұрын

What may I ask gives the church the right to tell anyone how science "should be done"? Then or now?

@notamoron2246

4 жыл бұрын

@the Lost Q He sounds like a flat erffer.

@nathanbossoh

4 жыл бұрын

@@notamoron2246 Because science is not an abstract concept, it is a social activity carried out by people. Today the scientific community in the West is largely practiced in a secular tone because more people in science are non-religious compared to then which is totally understandable. During that time the Church was the major player so, the question to you would be who would have practiced science in the West (on a major scale) if not for people within the Church?

His trial and sentencing is a prime example of any and everyone who places dogma at the top of the knowledge totem pole. We are a species that does not know it all and must use science as a tool to learn.

@thenowchurch6419

4 жыл бұрын

But I thought we knew it all ! Just kidding !

@russellewelchiii

4 жыл бұрын

Are you aware that things placed at the top of the totem pole are the most insignificant and that there significance grows as you work your way down. This is because in their philosophy those at the bottom hold all the others up. As opposed to the white man’s philosophy of being at the top is more important because what we value is power not Service.

@russellewelchiii

4 жыл бұрын

So to clarify saying something is at the top of the totem pole is to say that it lacks significance

@orglancs

4 жыл бұрын

Shawn Marrier: but science has its dogmas that it will not allow to be investigated, too. It treats 'heretics' worse than Gallileo was treated by the RC church. Those who dissent from modern scientific mechanism are rejected and written out of the history books.

@animalsarebeautifulpeople3094

4 жыл бұрын

@@orglancs no man made system is perfect and needs to be watched of course. The problem is also those who ignore the mountain of evidence such as flatearthers or anti-plant based carnists

Best Work i have seen from you yet 👍😄 Keep it comming 🤓

I loved this. More history would always be welcome. Edit: Also, congratulations on 300K subscribers. I just noticed that.

Very good stuff. Thank you for this video. Let me add a small detail. There was a personal angle to Galileo's trial (understandably) not mentioned here. In the Dialogue, the geocentric position is argued by a character named Simplicio. On the face of it, the name is a reference to a sixth century Aristotelian: Simplicius of Cilicia. And the character looks like being based on two contemporaries of Galileo: Lodovico delle Colombe and Cesare Cremonini. However, the character's name is really poorly chosen by Galileo. Galileo's enemies argued to the Pope (Urban VIII) that Simplicio is actually based on him (Urban), and that the name in fact suggests that the character is simple-minded ('semplice'). For Urban, that felt like a personal betrayal because he showed considerable favour to Galileo before. Let us not forget that the trial was not the only option for the Catholic Church at that point. And a heavy-handed treatment of a celebrity scientist came with very significant risks. And, as it happens, the trial indeed turned out to be a disaster inflicting massive reputational damage.

I’m sorry but I have to do this Galileo Galileo Galileo Figaro magnifico Easy come easy go will you let me go Bismillah!!! No!!! we will not let you go Mamma mia mamma mia mamma mia let me go

@thenowchurch6419

4 жыл бұрын

Just could not help it huh ? Bohemian Rhapsody strikes again.

@notamoron2246

4 жыл бұрын

Beelzabub has a devil put aside for you.

@notamoron2246

4 жыл бұрын

No need to apologise.

@garethbaus5471

4 жыл бұрын

I still don't understand why so many people like that song, I like most songs by queen but that song just annoys me.

@jackdavids2723

4 жыл бұрын

Gareth Baus you’re not alone. I for one don’t like it but it sure is catchy

Great vid. Loved your explaining of how science is more of a method than a thing.

just came across your channel, good stuff . very well researched

Your channel is spreading to schools now, i have to watch this for History

@conormannion7775

3 жыл бұрын

oh hey calem

@calemh5457

3 жыл бұрын

@@conormannion7775 hey

@sandermuller5427

3 жыл бұрын

Hello I have waited a week to watch this

Hi Alex, Thank you your refreshing look at the Galileo affair. I liked the content you put in the video which is much more accurate than other versions one might find on the Internet. There are, however, some things that lacked: 1. It would be interesting to mention why the Church did not have problems with Copernicus until 1616 (as opposed to just the Council of Trent). 2. One important thing you didn’t mention is Bellarmino’s reply to Foscarini 1615 in which he said that that: “I say that if there were a true demonstration that the sun is at the center of the world and the earth in the third heaven, and that the sun does not circle the earth but the earth circles the sun, then one would have to proceed with great care in explaining the Scriptures that appear contrary; and say rather that we do not understand them than that what is demonstrated is false.” 3. It was not mentioned that the reason why Galileo didn’t achieve this demonstration was because there was no such demonstration back then available, and that Galileo’s observations did not demonstrate this at all. They were however “proofs” that what was wrong was the Aristotelian system. 4. The Church recognized this and some, especially, Jesuits began to abandon Aristotelian cosmology in 1610s, while at the same time publically celebrating Galileo in Rome in 1610. But precisely because of this lack of evidence mentioned above, they were not converted to Copernicanism. 5. You didn’t mention Galileo’ ”bad science”, i.e., his reason he used to put forward in favour of Copernicanism. Especially his argument from the tides. This was rightfully rejected. Yet Galileo remained quite stubborn about this, but stubbornness is not a replacement for a good argument. 6. Here is the most crucial thing, as I see it: not once have you mentioned the geoheliocentric model od Tycho de Brahe. The connection and problem with Galileo is that he didn’t mention it either! His 1632 work is titled, “Dialogue Concerning Two Chief World Systems”. Which two? Aristotelianism and Copernicanism. So where is Brahe’s system? Nowhere. Because Galileo was not arguing against as he knew probably very well there was no observational difference back them between Brahe’s and Copernican system. He wanted to make his game easy and ignored Brahe to whose systems Church members were gradually turning to. So wasn’t Copernicanism much simpler and elegant than Brahe’s model? Not really. At a minimum Brahe didn’t need to explain the movement of the Earth (stationary in his system) which was against the common sense and where common sense was still, until Newton, was not trumped by good arguments. Plus, Copernicanism was even a bit more complex in its equants, eccentricities, and epicycles. So why not embrace Brahe’s system rather than the problematic Copernicanism? Galileo’s silence doesn’t give us the answer, but in a different sense, it does. 7. I of course agree that the Church did much wrong in preventing Galileo from speaking freely, but I think you’re too unfair here and try to bring the modern notion of science with its (still not very clear) boundaries onto the 17th century. I love your channel and thanks for all your effort!

@trueblueclue

3 жыл бұрын

Also he pretty much insulted everybody in his dialogues by portraying his opponents as inept morons. He wasn't the most savvy guy in a time where his then theories could've created a controversy in a very sensitive time of the post Tridentine church. See then cardinal Ratzinger's thoughts on the matter. TL,DR Galileo was way too blunt in his approach and pissed a lot of people off.

Very cool! Thanks for the great work! So much appreciated!!

Thank you for explaining the true story so well hope you do more

I've been trying to tell people this online for years and everytime I do people always call me a propagandist.

I'm not gay but you're so handsome, articulate and witty

@gsmarkham

4 жыл бұрын

I am gay... Ditto on the rest.

@pamelarojas7754

4 жыл бұрын

He is so attractive

@russ4moose

4 жыл бұрын

"I'm not gay, but" is the single gayest way to start a sentence.

@anthonynorman7545

4 жыл бұрын

@@russ4moose what about "this sentence and I are gay, and"

@stevem7945

4 жыл бұрын

@@russ4moose russ4more is the gayest name ever.

Simply and beautifully presented. Thank you.

Very high quality work. Thank you.

surprise, surprise, the church changes some text to fit their own narrative....

@santopino2546

4 жыл бұрын

Not true, the texts change themself to fit the Churches truths.

@ec6211

4 жыл бұрын

So does every religious institution in the world. That's how they stay in the business without becoming redundant.

@johnnotrealname8168

4 жыл бұрын

They did not change the text they changed the interpretation.

@bengreen171

4 жыл бұрын

@@johnnotrealname8168 they've done both. It is well known that whole chunks of the gospels are later additions, and there are lots of little changes as well - not all from simple scribal errors, but from monks who felt that they were making the "message" clearer - ie more in line with their own presuppositions.

@johnnotrealname8168

4 жыл бұрын

@@bengreen171 I know some parts of Mark were not written by whoever Mark is supposed to be but that is hardly the same as saying they purposely mistranslated. This would mean the Latin Vulgate today is different from the Complutensian Polyglot Bible which are both different from Saint Jerome's Latin Translation. I really doubt that.

Minor Error 3:51 - The Church never had an "official" interpretation of Scripture on that. That was just the assumed belief of many Church authorities. The Church never officially taught such idea though. This trial with Galileo helped form the official Church teachings on what it meant to interpret Scripture. The Church bows in humility and admits that Sacred Scripture may be misused to get scientific ideas, when in reality it mentions very few and mostly is for theological and salvific ideas. The only real scientific idea is the teaching of "ex nihilo" or creation from nothing. This is backed up by the Big Bang Theory, which is from a Catholic priest by the way. However, this is still largely a philosophical and theological truth then a scientific one.

Well done Alex. Marvellous how I can be so informed in twenty minutes..

As always, Alex, you are the voice of reason, thanks a lot

The Catholic Church found the 17th-century astronomer Galileo guilty of heresy for insisting the earth revolved around the sun. It did not rehabilitate him until 1992. As Hitchens said: Better late than never.

GG was never tortured but his imagination of torture went into overdrive!

@BlacksmithTWD

3 жыл бұрын

One must have a vivid imagination to come up with alternate models of the solar system already, can't rule out the possibility that he was actually threatened with torture that put it into overdrive.

Love your videos bro!

Thanks for the video, going through the historical documents.

"Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances,... and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all that we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, which people see as ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn." Augustine of Hippo

@chrisvalenzuela7911

2 жыл бұрын

"Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. Now it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics, and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn... If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe our books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren, ... to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call on Holy Scripture, .. although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. "

If the pope is god's representative on earth and was wrong, then it reasons that he didn't get his information from god. This stands to be true today as well.

@matthewking3318

4 жыл бұрын

Or, maybe god's just not very smart. As Frank Zappa postulated "if man was made in god's image, if man is dumb, then god is dumb, and maybe a little ugly on the side. "

@rayhanlahdji

3 жыл бұрын

That's why God is unimaginably unlike man, we are just in the form He creates to be best.

Great video, Alex!

Thanks for bringing facts to light!

"The church says the earth is flat; but I have seen its shadow on the moon, and I have more confidence even in a shadow than in the church."

@jordancox8294

4 жыл бұрын

What is that from? The church didn't think the earth was flat in Galileo's time so I'm assuming this is from some earlier period.

@lukaszkulasek

4 жыл бұрын

@@jordancox8294 yes you are right. True origins of this quote are unknown. I did put it here because I think it perfectly summarizes the way Galileo did think.

@jordancox8294

4 жыл бұрын

@@lukaszkulasek oh ok. I had never heard it before so I was curious.

@tonydarcy1606

4 жыл бұрын

Anyone living near the sea knew centuries before Galileo that the Earth was round. Eratosthenes had worked out the diameter of the Earth pretty accurately well before the Roman Empire and Jesus. When a ship comes or goes over the horizon the first / last thing you see is the top of the mast. Ergo the Earth is round.

@joekeenan6435

4 жыл бұрын

Europeans have know the Earth is round for 2500 years now, your quote is bogus

It was a time when "The Church" held sway. I'm happy that I was born in my time and place where I can free-think, express my opinions, be an atheist and enjoyably not be burned at the stake. Actually, house arrest wouldn't be too bad, as long as they didn't take his telescope away!

@FahadAyaz

4 жыл бұрын

"where I can free-think" 😬 Freedom, even in today's age, is an illusion, my friend! I refer you to Alex's previous video on free will 🙃 Seriously though, we are influenced and manipulated constantly. We are the product of our experiences and opinions repeated often enough soon start to sway and take hold in our minds.

@crhkrebs

4 жыл бұрын

Fahad Ayaz perhaps, but I for one, agree with rational guy. Just this sort of conversation would draw the attention of the Inquisition.

@PhilJonesIII

4 жыл бұрын

But you do not live in a time of 'free think' as you will quickly learn if you try to express some of those thoughts. The whole debate seems more about saving face, rather than the establishment of truth. At the time, the authority of the Catholic Church had taken a severe blow and was keen to maintain that authority at any cost. The situation is the same in political circles. In the 'Gulag Archipelago,' we see many examples of people being jailed, tortured or shot for expressing views that might be interpreted as against the state. The aim of the exercise was to suppress any and all discussion about the rightness of the current political regime. This attitude is alive and well today, in Western Society. You may not get shot for expressing contrary view but, those views can end your career (some shining careers) forever.

@mandarinablue8438

4 жыл бұрын

I guess it depends where you live. You won't be killed right away in the best case scenario but you're not exactly free either.

@Laotzu.Goldbug

2 жыл бұрын

The church still hold sway, in fact it holds more sway than it ever did before, it's just a different Church. Try mentioning any of the inconvenience scientific facts about race, IQ, sex, and everything else, and the modern Inquisition will descend on you and destroy your life far more quickly than the Catholic church ever could have

wow, what a great episode!!

This video was very well done. Thank you.

I thought your presentation was great. However I would like to comment upon its tight focus and narrow conclusion. It has to be taken as a given, from the viewpoint of today, that in 1632 the Church should not have cramped human freedom of thought. However from the viewpoint of 1632 itself, a number of very important differences between1632 and today ought to be recognized and mentioned. I think that atva minimum these issues are: 1. The close immediate association between human life and the afterlife as lived in 1632, full of demons, ghouls, angels, etc, in which everyone during this period lived; 2. The threat of Islam from Constantinople; 3. The utter devastation of the 30 Years War, 1618 to 1648; 4. The onset of horrific psychologic terrors involving witchcraft which were rampant during this period; 5. The syphilis epidemic which seemed to be a curse of God upon sinners and their progeny, 6. Galileo's own acceptance of Biblical authority, 7. The Spanish conquest of the Globe, the English and French challenge to this, and the extraordinary change in human life as wrought by these conflicts and foreign adventures. The political role played by the Church in maintaining civil peace and authority was significant during this period. In certain ways there was no acceptable alternative, but the Protestants would naturally debate this. The matter of Galileo was one small part of a much more complex situation. The political shadings of "scientific truth" are as imposing today as in 1632. I dont believe that we have changed reallybatvall. We just worship different Gods and seek to dodge different calamities. What would happen to your future s scientific career if with all good science you established that men are better than women? Or that euthenasia and eugenics weres good? Etc. A modern inquisition, with its modern lies and tricks, would descend upon you. I think your discussion would be more fair, and more interesting, and more relevant to today, if these additional factors ... which so thoroughly bias the search for truth ... were discussed, even slightly.

@TheReactor8

4 жыл бұрын

Mostly True, but does not take away the slightest of the scientific method vs dogma.

@Laotzu.Goldbug

2 жыл бұрын

@@TheReactor8 the problem is that modern science is as much dogma as it is "scientific method", in fact maybe even more.

"Context!" Is this turning into a Scholagladiatoria video?

@manusiabumi7673

4 жыл бұрын

Scholagladiatoria x Cosmic Sceptic possible crossover/collab? YES PLEASE!

@Ixnatifual

4 жыл бұрын

Who would win in a three-way free-for-all with a week to prepare? Galileo, the Pope or a German landsknecht?

@donsample1002

4 жыл бұрын

manusiabumi -- What's the best sword for chopping through specious rhetoric?

@xwarrior760

4 жыл бұрын

@@donsample1002 The pen of course

Great work, I really enjoyed the video.

Congrats to 300k!

Unfair things happened in the middle ages. Who wouldve thought. A very interesting story though!

@quantumaxe6468

4 жыл бұрын

Doesn't happen now, like at all.

@maxsimes

4 жыл бұрын

@@quantumaxe6468 to a much lesser extent though

@quantumaxe6468

4 жыл бұрын

@@maxsimes yeah, cause we pay attention to it all or care about it.

@maxsimes

4 жыл бұрын

@@quantumaxe6468 we do actually. Someone like galileo would have no problem talking freely today. I dont understand what point you are trying to make.

@quantumaxe6468

4 жыл бұрын

@@maxsimes different times, different heresies.

Those slides look suspiciously contrapoints... 🤨

Well done. I never heard the detail about Card. Bellarmine before. Your conclusion is spot-on.

Excellent. Very enjoyable and informative.

3:30 Poor guy :( His brilliant mind must have been suffering with so much cognitive dissonance

Still waiting for your Hijab debate review huhu. I also want to hear your take on the other decent muslim you've debated there.

Your videos are very enlightening. You have a lot of intellect and wisdom. Thanks for your insight.

We need more of these videos, WE DEMAND MORE !

Religion has held back human beings from developing, just like some religions are doing today. Like stopping any adverse questions or pointing out flaws in it.

@Lerian_V

4 жыл бұрын

But without religion, human beings will still be undeveloped. Galileo's religion didn't hold him back; he was deeply religious. He simply was ahead of his time. The church overreacted due to the schism (reformation) it suffered. Anyway, the church came around as soon as the evidence became compelling. The church is self-correcting in nature.

@stefandavenport1588

4 жыл бұрын

@Traditional Catholic The *bible* FALSELY teaches Geocentricity www.gatewayanabaptistchurch.com/2014/01/29/all-281-geocentric-references-of-the-holy-bible/ Read Joshua 10:12-13 carefully ; Joshua commanded BOTH the Sun _AND_ the Moon to stand still, NOT the Earth, which proves that the bible writers believed that the Sun ITSELF traveled around the Earth, and that it could actually be stopped, simply by a man's prayer to Yahweh/Jesus ! The Church verdict near the end of the video, based Galileo's conviction on " violations of the teachings of the Holy Scriptures " They used the scriptures cited in the link above ; the Church thinking was, that the bible was "inspired".

Wasn't there also a thing with Galileo's 'Dialogue' that made the Pope feel offended and irritated with the author, because he saw himself in the character defending the geocentric system (and their arguments being weaker than the ones presented by heliocentric system defender)? I remember reading about it somewhere...

@pansepot1490

4 жыл бұрын

Very probably. Galileo was a Tuscan and Tuscan people to this day are renowned for their sarcastic sense of humour.

@Mariomario-gt4oy

4 жыл бұрын

No that wasnt the case and was only brought up by catholics trying to jusrify what the church did and demonize Galileo when the entire church agreed what he said was heretical and contrary to "scripture" as they had sole authority and political power to do so and did to others as well as Galileo by imprisoning him

@DragonKing101

4 жыл бұрын

@@Mariomario-gt4oy" No that wasnt the case and was only brought up by catholics trying to jusrify what the church did" It kinda was the case. It was one of the main reasonings, considering the Pope got so butthurt over it. "when the entire church agreed what he said was heretical and contrary to "scripture"" The church didn't even care at first, and they were perfectly okay with him doing it - As long as he didn't try to put his words into scriptures that's. Which was one of the other main reason why they put him under house arrest. "did to others as well as Galileo by imprisoning him" House arrest wasn't even that bad, but I agree with what you're trying to get at. They completely overreacted to the situation.

@Mariomario-gt4oy

4 жыл бұрын

@@DragonKing101 uh no. 1. No he wasn't. There is no evidence supporting this and was peddled by Catholics to defend it. The ENTIRE CHURCH agreed to it. To claim "well he got angry" is an extreme mischaracterization 2. The church DID care. They cared if you tried to say something was factually true or tried to personally reinterpret the bible to fit reality. It was called heresy and numerous people were killed and imprisoned over it. 3. Uh someone was ARRESTED AND PUT TO JAIL IN THEIR OWN HOME. and had their work banned ( as well as copernicus) if they believed it went against the bible Thanks for proving my point. They censored him and put him in jail over scientific inquiry.

@DragonKing101

4 жыл бұрын

@@Mariomario-gt4oy" No he wasn't. There is no evidence supporting this and was peddled by Catholics to defend it. The ENTIRE CHURCH agreed to it." That's a load of garbage. Galileo's book, "The Dialogue Concerning the Two World Systems", there's a character named, "Simplicio" (Meaning Simple-Minded), and this character was quite clearly a parody of the Pope, as he was using quite a bit of the arguments that the Pope was making. Is it not clear that he was trying to take jabs at him and a few other of his opponents? Do you REALLY think the Pope would have taken all so kindly to that? "The church DID care. They cared if you tried to say something was factually true or tried to personally reinterpret the bible to fit reality." They DIDN'T care If he just stuck to the science. They of course did care with he tried to mix science with theology. "Uh someone was ARRESTED AND PUT TO JAIL IN THEIR OWN HOME. " Which ISN'T nearly as bad as being put into prison. He literally was given his nice villa in Florence, and freely allowed to work. It's still terrible that they did that of course, I'm not objecting to that, but it wasn't THAT bad. "as well as Copernicus" Which I of course agree with, they shouldn't have banned their works, especially with how they reacted in the Galileo affairs. But what I'm saying is this had little to do with: "Science vs The Church" And more so to do with their ideas having flaws with the models that, "Natural Philosophers" were going by, since they were applying Aristotle's Physics. They had a lot of clerks that agreed with them, and quite a few opponents as well, And in the case of Gallelio, getting all butthurt at him trying to apply his views to scriptures, and just not sticking to "Natural Philosophy" stays in Natural Philosophy.

Well argued Skeptic !!👍

Superinteresting video and easy to digest..more of this kind, pls... What really happened series

A Catholic apologist argued to me on Twitter this week that Galileo was justly punished for being arrogant. And people wonder why I insist that religion must never be allowed to have government power.

@rc7625

4 жыл бұрын

They all fucking repeat that apologist talking point like a bunch of NPCs. Truly annoying.

@j.k.6865

2 жыл бұрын

He's right though. Galileo was acting like a dick.

@gregcampwriter

2 жыл бұрын

@@j.k.6865 Pretend you're correct. So? The Church shouldn't have the power to punish anyone for that.

@j.k.6865

2 жыл бұрын

@@gregcampwriter the Church was the State back then. They had the full authority and the duty to place order.

@gregcampwriter

2 жыл бұрын

@@j.k.6865 Would you also like to explain that the sky's blue on a clear day, or have you exhausted your stock of statements that everyone in the discussion already know about? The Church shouldn't ever have had political power--I spell that out since you don't seem able to infer it.

“Produces” means “shows he had” the letter? I’m sorry, English is my second language...

@wwtory

4 жыл бұрын

I believe in this context it is a synonym of “brings out”...

@tonydarcy1606

4 жыл бұрын

Yes ! You have interpreted it correctly. In Galileo's case it means that he actually had the letter and he presented it to the court.

@wwtory

4 жыл бұрын

Tony D'Arcy Thank you! :)

@BlacksmithTWD

3 жыл бұрын

Native speakers tend to leave out what is commonly assumed, what those assumed things are is often hard to fill in for a non native speaker. In this case i would gues that: " 'produces (evidence for existence of)', 'presents' and 'shows he had'.. the letter" are the intended synonyms here. That these commonly assumed things can be vastly different even within the 'same' language but depending on geographical differences seems rather evident when for instance comparing daily uk english speech to daily us english speech. Another example would be the meaning of the word 'hockey' in Canada compared to other english speaking nations. As far as I've understood: best to avoid the entire subject when in Canada.

@wwtory

3 жыл бұрын

@@BlacksmithTWD Thank you very much for your kind and thorough reply. :')

I enjoyed this immensely!

Terrific video!More like this please...