You all know a bit of history. The discussion is like the blind men and the elephant. If you want to know about Galileo and the church, try the Catholic Encyclopedia:

"It is the great merit of Galileo that, happily combining experiment with calculation, he opposed the prevailing system according to which, instead of going directly to nature for investigation of her laws and processes, it was held that these were best learned by authority, especially by that of Aristotle, who was supposed to have spoken the last word upon all such matters, and upon whom many erroneous conclusions had been fathered in the course of time. Against such a superstition Galileo resolutely and vehemently set himself, with the result that he not only soon discredited many beliefs which had hitherto been accepted as indisputable, but aroused a storm of opposition and indignation amongst those whose opinions he discredited; the more so, as he was a fierce controversialist, who, not content with refuting adversaries, was bent upon confounding them. Moreover, he wielded an exceedingly able pen, and unsparingly ridiculed and exasperated his opponents. Undoubtedly he thus did much to bring upon himself the troubles for which he is now chiefly remembered. As Sir David Brewster (Martyrs of Science) says, "The boldness, may we not say the recklessness, with which Galileo insisted on making proselytes of his enemies, served but to alienate them from the truth."
Entire article here:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06342b.h...

Also, science in the Middle Ages, especially astronomy, was lively and practical. The problem of Easter required that astronomers reconcile the lunar and solar motions to predict the first Sunday after the first Full Moon after the First Day of Spring. Knowing 1000 years of history already, they extended their predictions far into the future ... and by 1250 knew that their models were problematic: they were off by a quarter of a day.

Mechanics also moved forward -- and Galileo's work in the 17th century rested on the Oxford Calculators of the 13th century.

More on my blog here:
http://necessaryfacts.blogspot.com/2012/...

Are you jealous or something? Do you want a point? First, when I want your opinion, I will give it to you. Second, I was teasing Hiraghm because I actually do know a lot about history and that was the first time I heard it explained so crudely.He charms me with his no-nonsense grit. His is a big picture look, but certainly not untrue; whereas, some of the things you said...tsk, tsk. Galileo first caught the notice of the Inquisition because he published in “The Starry Messenger” that he was a believer in Nicholas Copernicus heliocentric system, who at the time was denounced by the church. Galilieo was encouraged to publish, which he did, but not in Latin as was the case of most works by scholars at the time. No, Galileo chose to publish in Italian, the common language, making his rather controversial views very public, indeed. Of course, he did try to sell it in the public eye as ‘hypothetical’ to keep one step ahead of the Inquisition, but Hiragm is right, Italy was in economical decline and the last thing the Church needed was scripture to be questioned by science so publicly. It was an attack on their authority. You know, like Obama saying you can keep your insurance and your doctor, but he really knew the truth about that for the last two years.

I like your history lessons.

I won't go along with claims that I know are false. I'm saying I leave non-falsifiable claims alone.

I don't understand how it works but I know well-meaning scientifically-minded people who believe in religion. I don't feel the need to tear apart their beliefs as long as they aren't making scientifically falsifiable claims.