[Serious] Giordano Bruno

[The Architect Of Fate]

You have entirely failed to show that this is true.

Nope he more then showed it

---

It's kind of you to be concerned about the state of my underwear. I can assure you they're in reasonably good condition. (Cotton boxers from Uniqlo, 3 for 1000 yen!)

At this point I'm curious about why you were so sure earlier that Bruno was a martyr for science. Especially because, as you say, it doesn't affect the grand scheme of things. 

It looks as though FakeMessiah said Bruno was a martyr for science, and then I said he wasn't, and this prompted you to decide that I was wrong, despite the fact that you had never heard of Bruno before. In an honest disagreement about historical facts, we could decide the truth with reasonable confidence if we refer to the relevant documents. But you had made up your mind completely before you knew anything at all about the case. 

I find this way of deciding issues of fact to be strange.

I had made up my mind about you more than anything, and the OP is where you started. And I read little of what FM posts (sorry FM).

You seem more incensed that people are misstating that Bruno was killed because of science than the fact that he was killed quite horribly by the church for not towing the dogma line. And if he was as big a kook as you insist, then I see no reason to fear one man who probably had a very small following, if any at all. 

But off you go, claiming science to be an invalid reason. Which makes it sound like the church had valid reasons for killing. And you have stated very very little about how heinous a crime his burning actually was. If fact, you seem to voice little to no opinions regarding any atrocities (and they extend beyond killing) committed by the church or any of there followers.

I think your zeal for the perceived virtues and accomplishments of religion make your thinking misguided. Atrocities committed by any religions far outweigh any benefits. Benefits that humans were/are capable of generating without religion (because religion at it's very base is false). And that's the "issue of fact" that you should be incensed about, not that they got the science thing wrong.

So frankly, I find your ability to decide what is really important strange. After a few posts Tim got it, you didn't.

BTW, he was a scientist that the catholics killed. The End.

His statements are a classic case of 

[brewer]

Which makes it sound like the church had valid reasons for killing.

I have stated over and over that it was bad for the church to kill him.

BTW, he was a scientist that the catholics killed. The End.

You have entirely failed to show that this is true.

It was bad, that's it??? Cheating on a test is bad. Smoking is bad. Spanking your child is bad.

You're suppose to be religious, killing is one of the big one's and that's all you have to say, killing is bad? 

There is something wrong with you!!!

And other people have said he was a scientist also, I don't have to prove shit.

[Abaddon_ire]

Which makes it sound like the church had valid reasons for killing.

I have stated over and over that it was bad for the church to kill him.

BTW, he was a scientist that the catholics killed. The End.

You have entirely failed to show that this is true.

It doesn't matter. The church killed him. You cannot rehabilitate him by quibbling about their reasons. The simple fact remains that they killed him. He remains dead.

Did they do it for the wrong reasons? Sure.
Did they do it for the right reasons? Of course not.

It doesn't really matter. They killed him. Your church killed him.

You make a huge play out of this minutae. Simply because you want to recast the church at the time as being "in error", but your faith is not.