Europe owes its success to the ancient Greeks and Romans. The Rennaissance would not happened without the intellectual and architectural foundations left by these two civilizations. They would still be in a much worse dark ages were it not for the Greeks and Romans. Christianity is inherently anti-intellectual ism and set technological progress 1000 years back. Mars would have been colonized by now had the Roman Empire had not perished to these barbarians.
>>817162
>le renaissance was good maymay
The period of scientific regression was not positive in any way.
>>817162
Is this a meme thread?
>>817162
What if there was a true technocracy that developed in Europe similar to Belka in Strangereal? They would need a current day population of at least 100 million to have an effective space industry though.
>>817162
>Christislamity
fdfy
>>817162
This is satire correct?
>>817162
Hey Ray Kurzweil watcha doing?
>>817162
>>817215
Belka failed economically though. Sure, they were alone against a superpower who did everything they could to ruin them, but still.
>Dark Ages.
>>817162
Nice memes.
>>817284
That Tim O'neill guy has tons of good well sourced stuff on Quora.
>>817162
Watching too much Family Guy?
>Europe owes its success to older Europe
Renaissance literally means rebirth,it means rediscovery of ancient classical texts and learning and their applications in the arts and sciences. Second, it means that the results of these intellectual activities created a revitalization of European culture in general.
Da Vinci was an immense creative force at the start of the renaissance period.
Creating one of the first modern telescopes, Galileo revolutionised our understanding of the world supporting the work of Copernicus.
Paracelsus helped transform health care and was often considered the “Luther of Medicine” for his willingness to overturn conventional orthodoxy.
Erasmus was willing to raise questions about the teachings of the church and not relying on blind dogma. He was critical of the abuses of the church and advocated reform
>>818071
>supporting the work of Copernicus.
Supporting but not proving it though.
>>818088
The proof is obvious isnt it?
>>818093
Not when he was alive.
Holding a true opinion without being able to proof it's true is just superstition in the right belief.
>>818105
Galileo observed the phases of Venus, which proved that that planet orbits the Sun.
>>818112
>Copernicus had proposed a heliocentric model 32 years before Galileo was born and scholars and astronomers had been discussing this model and others like it ever since details of Copernicus' theory had been published in 1539. Copernicus' model was one of several that were under discussion and the subject of debate in Galileo's time; several of which were geocentric while several others were heliocentric. Galileo added to this debate via his observations using his telescope, particularly by his work on how the phases of Venus supported heliocentrism, but he did not "prove" heliocentrism at all.
>This was because, as Galileo and all other astronomers of the time knew, there were several serious objections to heliocentrism which were, at that stage, hard to definitively dismiss. The lack of an observable stellar parallax was one and several problems involving the inertia caused by a revolving earth were another. Both were the reasons the ancient Greeks had rejected heliocentrism in the first place and neither were conclusively solved until long after Galileo's death.
>So while Galileo argued strongly for the Copernican model, he did not "prove" heliocentrism conclusively. He was also wrong about several key details - particularly the shape of planetary orbits (he rejected Kepler's theory of elliptical orbits and clung to circular ones) and his idea that the tides were caused by the earth's rotation. The idea that he proved heliocentrism is myth.
>>817162
>Mars would have been colonized by now had the Roman Empire had not perished to these barbarians
What does this memery even mean?
>>818115
How does proving Venus orbits the sun not prove heliocentric?
>>818134
I quoted it right there.
>>818158
wiki quote was it? Facts for simpltons
If the phases of venus shows it orbits the sun, it is more proof than everything orbiting the earth.
>>818117
Started as anti-catholic rhetoric from protestants and later got picked up by atheists because protestants are too stupid to see where the logical extremes of their claims lead.
