How I got excommunicated by the Galileo Movement

It's a sad, sad story:

Steven Mosher explained

Why is he the way he is? Now it's a little clearer:

That's right. He's performed deconstructions. You sit with that, four eyes, with your "science" and your "data." You ponder it.

Rick Perry launches the Galileo Gambit into the mainstream

We were there first. (Well, useless you count RationalWiki or Respectful Insolence, who wrote about the phenomenon in 2006). But Rick Perry's bumbling allusion to the the skeptic meme has brought the Galileo Gambit a lot more unwelcome attention:

Rick Perry’s Inane Miscue on Galileo and Climate Change

Fineman: Perry Over His Head On Climate Change

I knew Galileo. Rick Perry, you are no Galileo.

Rick Perry's Galileo Metaphor Is Totally Backwards

[W]hat Perry fails to realize is the fact that the scientific community actually agreed with Galileo. It was the clergy who outvoted him, accusing him of being a heretic. "By the time Galileo was publishing on heliocentrism, the idea was already circulating and widely accepted in scientific circles, including Jesuits," explains Joshua Rosneau from the National Center for Science Education. "He wasn't outvoted by scientists, he was outvoted by the political and religious leadership of his country."

The example of Galileo would actually make a great metaphor for climate change scientists, not the deniers. Following his Galileo blunder, Perry parrots the familiar political reasoning behind brushing off the theory of climate change, one supported by the vast majority of environmental scientists--97 percent of them, in fact.

The Galileo Gambit; rule number one is…

Earth to Rick: when deciding to use the Galileo Gambit, rule number one is “You Are Not Galileo”. And neither are the carbon-energy industry funded thinktank mouthpieces, or the Fox News bobbleheads who invite them in for unlimited airtime.

Is Rick Perry a 21st-century Galileo?

They're both victims of persecution though … In a way, yes. Galileo was put on trial by the Roman Inquisition and sentenced to house arrest for almost 10 years until his death, while Perry has been plagued by pesky scientists wielding facts.

Facts? Considered a form of psychological abuse by some on the Christian right.

It sounds like Galileo was lucky to escape with his life. Yes, unlike the 234 people executed under Perry's governorship.

So is Perry a genius? During a severe drought this April, Perry proclaimed a three-day "prayer for rain". Conditions worsened.

From the International Business Times: Rick Perry: Modern-Day Galileo of Climate Science?

The Los Angeles Times: Rick Perry: He's no Galileo

The New York Times: Divining Perry’s Meaning in ‘Galileo’ Remark

There are more . . . a lot more . . . but that is probably enough to be getting on with (feel free to post a link in the comments). It didn't seem at the time that Perry's Galileo moment was going to go over well, and indeed it hasn't. I'm not even coming across rapturous celebrations of the analogy one would expect from the usual quarters. The right seems to want to forget about this little rhetorical flourish. Maybe they will give up on Galileo, move on to some other totally inappropriate analogy with a famous scientist/victim of persecution. Ignaz Semmelweis, perhaps?

Minor myths: the Galileo Gambit

Him, not you, Tony.



From the Rationalwiki:

The Galileo gambit, or Galileo fallacy, is the notion that if you are vilified for your ideas, you must be right. It refers to Galileo Galilei's famous persecution at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church for his defence of heliocentrism in the face of the orthodox Biblical literalism of the day. People use this argument repeatedly in response to serious criticisms that more often than not they just don't understand.

Amen. And there are a few other salient points about the example of Galileo we ought bear in mind. Galileo was a scientific producer, not primarily a critic (although he could write a mean polemic when he had a mind, but little of that work has stood the test of time). He designed his own instruments, and with those instruments he made observations, and it was in explaining those observations that he came into conflict with the church.

This is the case with most of the iconoclastic scientists to whom we are invited to compare Monckton, Soon, Spencer et al: Galileo and Darwin and Newton and Einstein and so on. "Skeptics" cite them because they challenged the consensus. They pay less attention to the fact that they did so by providing compelling explanations for observed facts, not by ridiculing the existing theories as failures.

This is not the case with most deniers. Compare the goals of "The Galileo Movement," an anti-climate-science outfit, on their website:

1. Scientific untruths

Start following the money yourself. Begin replacing climate guilt and fear with reassurance, peace and security.

Summary...
2. Science facts & futility

Discover truth by understanding real-world facts about Nature and science. Reclaim Nature's clarity, beauty, harmony, order and inspiration.

Summary...
3. The cost to you & hypocrisy

Why pay dearly for nothing? Discover how to protect the environment by maintaining economic security, choices and freedom - while saving money.

Summary...
4. Restoring morality & justice

Discover for yourself peace, fairness, ease and trust by really caring for the environment.

Read more...
5. Protecting freedom

Belonging to the human community - rediscovering choice, responsibility, protection, hope.

In this blizzard of highly emotive verbiage, they manage to mention peace, money, freedom, caring, choice, beauty, harmony, order, and inspiration, but not evidence, argument, observation, analysis, theory, reason, logic, deduction or risk.

Galileo was also a seriously studious professional academic:

Although he seriously considered the priesthood as a young man, he enrolled for a medical degree at the University of Pisa at his father's urging. He did not complete this degree, but instead studied mathematics.[16]

Galileo was also studious of disegno, a term encompassing fine art, and in 1588 attained an instructor position in the Accademia delle Arti del Disegno in Florence, teaching perspective and chiaroscuro. Being inspired by the artistic tradition of the city and the works of the Renaissance artists, Galileo acquired an aesthetic mentality. While a young teacher at the Accademia, he began a lifelong friendship with the Florentine painter Cigoli, who included Galileo's lunar observations in one of his paintings.[17][18]

In 1589, he was appointed to the chair of mathematics in Pisa. In 1591 his father died and he was entrusted with the care of his younger brother Michelagnolo. In 1592, he moved to the University of Padua, teaching geometry, mechanics, and astronomy until 1610.[19] During this period Galileo made significant discoveries in both pure fundamental science (for example, kinematics of motion and astronomy) as well as practical applied science (for example, strength of materials and improvement of the telescope). His multiple interests included the study of astrology, which at the time was a discipline tied to the studies of mathematics and astronomy.

By the time of the heliocentrism controversy that brought Galileo into conflict with the church, in 1616, he had been teaching at university for twenty-eight years. He was an expert in multiple fields and he made substantial contributions to physics, astronomy, mathematics, materials engineering and optics. He was not the equivalent of a skeptic blogger whose scientific education consists of daily visits to WUWT. He was not a self-taught auteur. He was a widely acknowledged genius that had been churning out original scientific work for several decades.

Nor was Galileo always right. Forget trusting people because they are like Galileo, if you took the side of the actual, literal Galileo against his contemporaries you'd spend a lot of time being wrong.

* Galileo thought the Sun caused the tides (in deference to any "skeptics" visiting: it's the moon).
* Galileo thought planetary orbits were perfectly circular; he rejected Kepler's (correct) theory of elliptical orbits.
* Galileo denied that comets were physical objects, arguing that they were mere reflections or optical illusions, like a rainbow.

If even actually being Galileo doesn't make you right, then comparing yourself to the great scientist is not going to cut the mustard.