Michal J A Paszkiewicz
@michalyoudoing.bsky.social
History of Science, Astronomy, Cartography, Transport, Software, AI
Translating 17th century Astronomy texts
Author:
-The Perfect Transport: and the science of why you can't have it
-Almagestum Novum: History of Astronomy
Translating 17th century Astronomy texts
Author:
-The Perfect Transport: and the science of why you can't have it
-Almagestum Novum: History of Astronomy
Galileo truly started the great tradition of scientists writing error-ridden pop sci books that fill the general population with awe and wonder.
November 11, 2025 at 8:19 AM
Galileo truly started the great tradition of scientists writing error-ridden pop sci books that fill the general population with awe and wonder.
You were all great sports, this isn't how it usually goes on X!
November 9, 2025 at 12:00 PM
You were all great sports, this isn't how it usually goes on X!
...when as far as they cared, it had been shown that ideas were, in fact, dangerous, as seen by the widespread warfare and destruction that had happened in Europe over the various Christian schisms.
November 8, 2025 at 7:45 PM
...when as far as they cared, it had been shown that ideas were, in fact, dangerous, as seen by the widespread warfare and destruction that had happened in Europe over the various Christian schisms.
Yes, they were driven by the idea that anything printed should be 100% correct... ultimately an impossible task.
The Venetians cared less about this, and were printing everything and anything, completely ignoring any Inquisitors sent over, this was seen highly problematic in an era...
The Venetians cared less about this, and were printing everything and anything, completely ignoring any Inquisitors sent over, this was seen highly problematic in an era...
November 8, 2025 at 7:45 PM
Yes, they were driven by the idea that anything printed should be 100% correct... ultimately an impossible task.
The Venetians cared less about this, and were printing everything and anything, completely ignoring any Inquisitors sent over, this was seen highly problematic in an era...
The Venetians cared less about this, and were printing everything and anything, completely ignoring any Inquisitors sent over, this was seen highly problematic in an era...
... he probably would have gone to jail.
November 8, 2025 at 7:30 PM
... he probably would have gone to jail.
He was charged with "vehement suspicion of heresy" - a lesser charge, usually given to those who gave gifts to or housed heretics.
He was not tortured, although he was threatened with torture at the start of the deposition, a formulaic part of every trial at the time.
If he hadn't recanted...
He was not tortured, although he was threatened with torture at the start of the deposition, a formulaic part of every trial at the time.
If he hadn't recanted...
November 8, 2025 at 7:30 PM
He was charged with "vehement suspicion of heresy" - a lesser charge, usually given to those who gave gifts to or housed heretics.
He was not tortured, although he was threatened with torture at the start of the deposition, a formulaic part of every trial at the time.
If he hadn't recanted...
He was not tortured, although he was threatened with torture at the start of the deposition, a formulaic part of every trial at the time.
If he hadn't recanted...
Nothing to do with offense, more to do with historical accuracy.
Perhaps it is the admission that *should* count, but wasn't what was implied in the post I initially replied to.
Historians still consider the situation kind of unresolved, since 1992 stopped short of an actual apology.
Perhaps it is the admission that *should* count, but wasn't what was implied in the post I initially replied to.
Historians still consider the situation kind of unresolved, since 1992 stopped short of an actual apology.
November 8, 2025 at 7:28 PM
Nothing to do with offense, more to do with historical accuracy.
Perhaps it is the admission that *should* count, but wasn't what was implied in the post I initially replied to.
Historians still consider the situation kind of unresolved, since 1992 stopped short of an actual apology.
Perhaps it is the admission that *should* count, but wasn't what was implied in the post I initially replied to.
Historians still consider the situation kind of unresolved, since 1992 stopped short of an actual apology.
The 1992 speech was only novel in being the first time that a Pope publicly stated that Galileo had been mistreated.
It was, unfortunately, pretty poorly covered by the media, which tried to sensationalise something that was pretty much a non-event that didn't achieve what the Pope set out to do.
It was, unfortunately, pretty poorly covered by the media, which tried to sensationalise something that was pretty much a non-event that didn't achieve what the Pope set out to do.
November 8, 2025 at 6:43 PM
The 1992 speech was only novel in being the first time that a Pope publicly stated that Galileo had been mistreated.
It was, unfortunately, pretty poorly covered by the media, which tried to sensationalise something that was pretty much a non-event that didn't achieve what the Pope set out to do.
It was, unfortunately, pretty poorly covered by the media, which tried to sensationalise something that was pretty much a non-event that didn't achieve what the Pope set out to do.
The Roman Inquisition formally acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758, when they dropped the generic entry from the index.
Some people are catching up with history in 2025, a considerably longer delay.
Some people are catching up with history in 2025, a considerably longer delay.
November 8, 2025 at 6:21 PM
The Roman Inquisition formally acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758, when they dropped the generic entry from the index.
Some people are catching up with history in 2025, a considerably longer delay.
Some people are catching up with history in 2025, a considerably longer delay.
Galileo wasn't threatened with death.
November 8, 2025 at 6:20 PM
Galileo wasn't threatened with death.
The Church had no issues with Sidereus Nuncius.
The issues started with the Letter to Castelli.
The issues started with the Letter to Castelli.
November 7, 2025 at 7:48 PM
The Church had no issues with Sidereus Nuncius.
The issues started with the Letter to Castelli.
The issues started with the Letter to Castelli.
oh, and in the source materials that I work on translating
November 1, 2025 at 11:50 AM
oh, and in the source materials that I work on translating
What I wrote here I read in secular journals and history books.
November 1, 2025 at 11:49 AM
What I wrote here I read in secular journals and history books.
It's rather sad that you like something that is historically illiterate.
Natural science was taught from Greek, Roman, and later Arabic sources, such as: Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy, Discorides, Galen, and later Avicenna, Averroes, Alhazen.
Natural science was taught from Greek, Roman, and later Arabic sources, such as: Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy, Discorides, Galen, and later Avicenna, Averroes, Alhazen.
October 31, 2025 at 11:28 PM
It's rather sad that you like something that is historically illiterate.
Natural science was taught from Greek, Roman, and later Arabic sources, such as: Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy, Discorides, Galen, and later Avicenna, Averroes, Alhazen.
Natural science was taught from Greek, Roman, and later Arabic sources, such as: Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy, Discorides, Galen, and later Avicenna, Averroes, Alhazen.
And you miss the point entirely.
Any serf could join, or aid a monastery as a lay helper, just as well as any noble, and receive exactly the same quarters and an education.
There were of course later issues with corruption, paid positions, and state interference.
Any serf could join, or aid a monastery as a lay helper, just as well as any noble, and receive exactly the same quarters and an education.
There were of course later issues with corruption, paid positions, and state interference.
October 31, 2025 at 8:52 PM
And you miss the point entirely.
Any serf could join, or aid a monastery as a lay helper, just as well as any noble, and receive exactly the same quarters and an education.
There were of course later issues with corruption, paid positions, and state interference.
Any serf could join, or aid a monastery as a lay helper, just as well as any noble, and receive exactly the same quarters and an education.
There were of course later issues with corruption, paid positions, and state interference.
I directly addressed historical errors in your post. You decided to change subject.
October 31, 2025 at 8:48 PM
I directly addressed historical errors in your post. You decided to change subject.
That's not how medieval education worked.
You had to study the natural sciences, law and the arts, and only once you had studied those could you study philosophy, and only those who mastered philosophy could study Theology.
So most of the education had little to do with the Bible.
You had to study the natural sciences, law and the arts, and only once you had studied those could you study philosophy, and only those who mastered philosophy could study Theology.
So most of the education had little to do with the Bible.
October 31, 2025 at 8:47 PM
That's not how medieval education worked.
You had to study the natural sciences, law and the arts, and only once you had studied those could you study philosophy, and only those who mastered philosophy could study Theology.
So most of the education had little to do with the Bible.
You had to study the natural sciences, law and the arts, and only once you had studied those could you study philosophy, and only those who mastered philosophy could study Theology.
So most of the education had little to do with the Bible.
How is the invention by James Franklin that such a topic was discussed relevant to your historical errors being corrected?
October 31, 2025 at 8:41 PM
How is the invention by James Franklin that such a topic was discussed relevant to your historical errors being corrected?
No, there was no apology in 1992
historyforatheists.com/2025/03/gali...
Heliocenttism was acknowledged by the Roman Inquisition in 1758.
historyforatheists.com/2025/03/gali...
Heliocenttism was acknowledged by the Roman Inquisition in 1758.
Did the Pope Apologise to Galileo? - History for Atheists
It is often claimed the Catholic Church only accepted heliocentrism in 1992 when the Pope apologised to Galileo. But is this true? %
historyforatheists.com
October 31, 2025 at 8:38 PM
No, there was no apology in 1992
historyforatheists.com/2025/03/gali...
Heliocenttism was acknowledged by the Roman Inquisition in 1758.
historyforatheists.com/2025/03/gali...
Heliocenttism was acknowledged by the Roman Inquisition in 1758.
What, by providing the world's first free education, the first education system that transcended class, and building the university system?
October 31, 2025 at 8:37 PM
What, by providing the world's first free education, the first education system that transcended class, and building the university system?
1. There was no apology to Galileo in 1992. The speech was only novel in being the 1st time a Popebstated Galileo had been mistreated.
historyforatheists.com/2025/03/gali...
2. The Roman Inquisition acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758 when they dropped the generic entry from the index.
historyforatheists.com/2025/03/gali...
2. The Roman Inquisition acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758 when they dropped the generic entry from the index.
Did the Pope Apologise to Galileo? - History for Atheists
It is often claimed the Catholic Church only accepted heliocentrism in 1992 when the Pope apologised to Galileo. But is this true? %
historyforatheists.com
October 31, 2025 at 8:36 PM
1. There was no apology to Galileo in 1992. The speech was only novel in being the 1st time a Popebstated Galileo had been mistreated.
historyforatheists.com/2025/03/gali...
2. The Roman Inquisition acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758 when they dropped the generic entry from the index.
historyforatheists.com/2025/03/gali...
2. The Roman Inquisition acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758 when they dropped the generic entry from the index.
No, the Roman Inquisition acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758.
The other Inquisitions never pursued the subject.
The other Inquisitions never pursued the subject.
October 25, 2025 at 9:51 PM
No, the Roman Inquisition acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758.
The other Inquisitions never pursued the subject.
The other Inquisitions never pursued the subject.
I'd be interested in researching Baliani more. Riccioli worked with him a bit, and Riccioli included in the AN a reference to a conversation with Baliani where Baliani had suggested a Lunacentric model
October 11, 2025 at 9:03 AM
I'd be interested in researching Baliani more. Riccioli worked with him a bit, and Riccioli included in the AN a reference to a conversation with Baliani where Baliani had suggested a Lunacentric model
Alberto A Martinez, Science Secrets, Chapter 1
October 11, 2025 at 9:01 AM
Alberto A Martinez, Science Secrets, Chapter 1