The year is 1631 and some priests are meeting in the Collegio Romano, the Jesuits' centre for scientific research in Rome. The Collegio had celebrated Galileo's astronomical discoveries decades before but was shortly to become his adversary (see Galileo's Battle for the Heavens). This meeting wasn't about Galileo. It was to decide what to do with a parcel of tree bark that had arrived from Jesuits in Peru. The bark was being used by natives in Peru to fight off chills. They chose to test if tea made from the bark could combat the chills associated with malaria. Their experiment would change the course of history (see The Jesuit's Bark). The bark was rich in quinine, an anti-malarial compound. Over centuries millions would benefit from this discovery. For the Jesuits, science was much more than just astronomy. There is a lesson here for modern discussions of church and science.
Discussions on the church and science are very common on the internet. The problem is that they are not very scientific. They obsess over events that happened over 350 years ago from one discipline in science, astronomy and ignore more recent events and more active disciplines. They never seem to justify why astronomy or the events are so important. There is a good reason. They can't in any reasonable scientific manner. The map of modern science below (taken from Eigenfactor-Mapping Science) shows that astronomy is neither very active nor very influential on other disciplines compared to very active disciplines such as Cell Biology. It also shows that science is much more than astronomy.
There is also a disconnect with earlier science. The word cloud below shows the most commonly cited scientists from various European reference books from 1758 ( see Galileo's Contemporaries). Galileo, Kepler and Copernicus,so important to astronomy, are missing from the word cloud. The names in light grey were contemporaries of Galileo. These scientists made contributions to electricity, optics, classical mechanics, atomism, analytical geometry, hydraulics and other fields. For more about Galileo's contemporaries see Galileo Contemporaries Timeline.
Science is as much about how you study things as it is about what you study. Scientists are careful about their data. Discussions on church and science are not. That is why they are often peppered with myths. These myths have even trapped famous scientists (see The Galileo Myths). One myth even transformed Galileo's spacious 5 room suite in the Palace of the Inquisition into a dungeon (see Myth 3,The Galileo Myths). The floor plan of Galileo's suite is shown below.
Science isn't just about hypotheses and theories. It's about models, too. The Copernican Model is a common topic in discussions of church and science. It is not discussed as a scientist would. When scientists discuss models they are interested in how well predictions from a model fit with real world data. In the numerous discussions of the Copernican Model, it is difficult to find any that mention this "goodness of fit"?
We are taught some very strange things about the history of science. Science needed a Galileo to discover the parabolic trajectory of projectiles, a Newton to invent calculus, and an Einstein to develop Special Relativity theory. This is the Great Man approach to history. In fact, science didn't need a Galileo, Newton, or Einstein for those advances. The answers were already "in the air" (see In the Air). In each case, there were others who arrived at the same conclusions independently around the same time. Multiple discoveries are common in science.
Historians of Science dropped the Great Man Theory because it presents a shallow view of the history (see Modern Science). Today science depends on technology for instrumentation and universities as a locale for research and training ground for scientists. That means the history of technology and universities is important to the history of science. This means that actions of the church to formalize the structure of the modern university between the 11th and 13th century is important to the history of science.
The goal of these pages is to give a better glimpse of the big picture than personality-based discussions. Modern Science and The Scientific Method presumes that intelligent discussions of church and science should start with a discussion of modern science. Pages on modern scientists such as Gregor Mendel, Francesco Redi and Alfred Wegener follow on this theme. The Calculatores describes how the calculatory tradition so important to modern Western science had its origins well before the Scientific Revolution. Galileo's Battle for the Heavens presents several of the "missing bits" from discussions of the Galileo Affair. Galileo's Contemporaries and Galileo's Contemporaries Timeline illustrate how Galileo was not working in a vacuum. The discovery of a remedy for malaria was an important discovery during Galileo's time (see The Jesuit's Bark). Galileo narratives consistently ignore another contemporary, Johannes Kepler.Finally, The Real da Vinci Code explores the censorship of Pierre Duhem, a historian of science who had discovered important advances in science originating in the Middle Ages.