[Serious] Giordano Bruno

[Belacqua]

And were the prosecutors reports independently reviewed and interviewed by an impartial source? What if they were the equivalent of AG Barr? You don't know. 

They were independently reviewed by the scholars whom I have named, whom you have chosen not to read.

I agree with you that partial sources should not be trusted without criticism. 

What history says about the catholic church of the 1500's makes my suspicion completely founded. 

For example? Names, dates, sources, please....

The stink raised by the church, read. 

What stink exactly? Names, dates, sources....

I base my opinion by the catholic churches actions at the time. 

For example? Names, dates, sources...

You come into every thread with a religious bias.

Textbook example of the ad hominem logical fallacy. You can't argue your case based on what you imagine I am like. You have to deal with facts. 

Thinking people reach their conclusions based on reasons. Logic, evidence, facts, etc. 

We have these conversations in order to test our reasons, and allow them to be challenged. (At least, that's why I have them.) Automatically filtering out sources which may challenge our reasons is not how thinking people operate. 

You have stated your reasons, but not shown that they are anything more than prejudices. Basically, "religion bad." So I'm asking for something more than assertions without evidence. Names, dates, documents, scholarly sources, etc.