> They hardly look any different, at least to a layman: That is argument for what exactly? That only "proves" that the layman can't understand something that i

> They hardly look any different, at least to a layman: That is argument for what exactly? That only "proves" that the layman can't understand something that is "hard". "Math is hard, lets go shopping" argument. Galileo didn't have to simply "believe" Copernicus, he was physically the first man ever to see the moons of Jupiter with this own eyes, using the telescope he made with this own hands. The mere existence of these moons was completely against the church doctrine, explicitly stated by the Inquisition in the official sentence with which he was sentenced: "the above-mentioned Galileo, because of the things deduced in the trial and confessed by you as above, have rendered yourself according to this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely of having held and believed a doctrine which is false and contrary to the divine and Holy Scripture: that the sun is the center of the world and does not move from east to west, and the earth moves and is not the center of the world, and that one may hold and defend as probable an opinion after it has been declared and defined contrary to Holy Scripture."