Science and the Church

>>2003979
It wasn't that the Church was at particular odds with science, but rather that it was on very shaky ground everywhere due to the turmoil of the reformation and counter reformation. The Church was against Galileo for suggesting that Aristotle was wrong, not being able to provide convincing proof of his model, and being arrogant when confronted about that. As far as Linnaeus goes, I think people were just scandalized at his gratuitous sexualization of plants.

File: Simian.jpg (607KB, 1003x862px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 1003x862px

>>2004004
What about the whole "Anthropomorpha" thing?

>>2003979
A LOT of scientific advancement originated among Roman Catholics. For political reasons the turmoil beginning in the early modern era is emphasized in our textbooks.

File: Scopes.jpg (2MB, 2013x1120px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2013x1120px

>>2004041
Never said it didn't. I just know that every group has their share of quarrels.

>>2004095
Is pic relevant? Because the whole creationism vs evolution saga didn't have to do with The Church. It was a Protestant thing.

File: Timeline.jpg (56KB, 970x530px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 970x530px

>>2004164
Somewhat, I just know that every so often we have a sort of "religion vs science'" spat, and then we move on, only for it to happen again.

>>2004177
Religion vs science is much different than The Church vs. science.

If you really want to analyze whether most religions conflict with science I suppose you can start with this: Many religious sects reject the use of technology for moral reasons. The conflict isn't based on understanding how the world works but on concepts of morality.