He eventually was charged with hersay because he had not proof.   You could only be charged with hersay if you had none.   If you had actual scientific proof there was nothing the church could do to you.

The Church charged Galileo for heresy because he supported the Heliocentric Model.  Thats the facts, thats history.  The above quote was the Church statement, and you are literally trying to reverse what the Church said on the matter.

The only 'historians' supporting your warped view are Catholic groups themselves.  Like you, they are seeking ingornance against the fact that the Church charged Galileo with believing the heliocentric model, and that the church banned all writings of concerning the heliocentric model (including Copernicus' who knew better than to publish his papers before he was on his deathbed).  This was the time of the Inqusition, yet you and other revisionists want to paint Christians as tolerant, secular, progress loving Catholics who only condemned Galileo and others like him for not having enough proof.

I won't continue this discussion with you any further.  If a man truly believes in fairies and unicorns, how can you convince him otherwise?

.... so you didn't read the Wikipedia or haven't read anything about the actual trials of Galieo.

Your attempts to try and save face are just making you look ridiculious.

You do know that Copernicus' books were not only published by the Catholic Church but also circulated by them up until a scientific council found them lacking vs the Tycho model.

I don't want to get into the middle of this, because I'm willing to admit that I have fairly limited information, but the anti-Catholic Church propaganda over the past several generations has been highly effective at spreading misinformation.

The post I responded to (which started this entire side track) demonstrated one very well known myth; that scientific information was "lost" in the dark ages because of religion. It is (somewhat) true that the Ancient Romans had an advanced understanding of many scientific areas of study, but there were several reasons why it was "lost" that had little to do with religion. The core reason that there is evidence for is that most information on a lot of fields was not really shared all that well; in a large part because keeping information secret gave people power. An example of what I'm talking about is that many acts of gods in religious temples were created using machines; and these machines were based on many of the same principles that were taken advantage of to start the industrial revolution. Unfortunately, a plague, famine or war could kill off the people who built these machines; and the information about how they were produced would die with them.

(1) Christians (and muslims) are responsable for the destruction of many texts from the Library.

(2) I don't see why the "values" that you mentioned are in anyway usefull to the human race. I'd say quite the opposite. I don't think that individual's work has any value.

Yeah, and our country (USA) did a fine job of viewing blacks and women of equal value throughout its christian/western value dominated history. Please.

To act as though the "values" of the western world or christian world should be put on a pedestal i direct you to the catholic church and islamaphobia USA.

With your sarcasm you made the perfect point, even though you did not want to.

Christian / Western values have changed and evolved over the years. Islamist values did not.
Women / black people / gay people are all equal and live peacefully in one society. We don't have to discuss about the fact that this wasn't the case a couple of hundred years ago.

The Islamist values did not evolve like the Western / Christians. That is the whole point. Merkel wants them to accept these western / christian standards without losing their religion.

Right now we have areas, where only a handful of people speak German, women wear the burca and minorities are not welcome. Remember: Germans are a minority in these areas as well. So as a German you are not welcome in some parts of Germany. Scary thought, right?

With your sarcasm you made the perfect point, even though you did not want to.

Christian / Western values have changed and evolved over the years. Islamist values did not.
Women / black people / gay people are all equal and live peacefully in one society. We don't have to discuss about the fact that this wasn't the case a couple of hundred years ago.

The Islamist values did not evolve like the Western / Christians. That is the whole point. Merkel wants them to accept these western / christian standards without losing their religion.

Right now we have areas, where only a handful of people speak German, women wear the burca and minorities are not welcome. Remember: Germans are a minority in these areas as well. So as a German you are not welcome in some parts of Germany. Scary thought, right?

1. Not true... using this searchable quran with yusaf ali traslation.... http://www.islamicity.com/quransearch/

2:62 (Y. Ali) Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the jewish (scriptures), and the christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

RE: (9:29) Let's look at the full context beginning on 9:25...

9:25 (Y. Ali) Assuredly Allah did help you in many battle-fields and on the day of Hunain: Behold! your great numbers elated you, but they availed you naught: the land, for all that it is wide, did constrain you, and ye turned back in retreat.

If you know history, this is in relation to after the recent battle for Meccah where Muslim's were finally in control. God is speaking to those who retreated in fear even though the outcome was a win for the Muslims. He's telling them to not be afraid and to always trust God. 9:29 continues that trust and the use of 'fight' is not intended as a command to go out and kill. Its a command to not give up on your religion and to continue to strive forward. Notice there is no mention of physical attack, just taxation (Jizya). If you study the history of Islams rise to power in the world, it was actually full of little warfare. Constantinople(Egypt's) itself fell without bloodshed because the Muslim army offered a very low Jizya tax (actually lower than what the Christian Romans required) in exchange for being under Muslim command. This was also provided freedom to worship Christianity the way they chose, which was also at odds with the Roman Catholic Church.

So, this does not mean to seek out war on others, its a cry to not be scared when you have God's backing and to continue the fight. As I said before, this must be taken with the whole book as well. There are numerous areas that describe the rules of war a Muslim must follow. It always reiterates that war is for defense only and they cannot attack others without provocation or in the defense of the weak. So the idea that this is telling Muslims to go out and attack others is contradictory to the full revelation of the Qur'an.

As an example, this verse exemplifies my position with two translations.

2:190 (Y. Ali) Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

2:190 (Picktall) Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not, aggressors.

As you can see it says to fight those who are fighting you and to not start the fight as God does not like those who attack first. This is also a repeated idea at the end of almost any set of verses on the rules of war and to always strive for peace.

As for #2 on your quote, I have never heard anyone say Muhammad chose to not keep some things that came from God. In fact, the only history I've read was that Muhammad refused to allow anything to be written down unless he said it was from God. Which is another reason I think the Hadiths should be removed from Islamic study. Any cleric I heard stating what you said would send a massive red flag up as someone seeking control. Same reasoning Christians in the Middle Ages were not allowed to read the Bible; could only listen to priest.