The very next clause is > and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts many places the sense of Holy Scripture The paper that you cite, claiming tha

The very next clause is > and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts many places the sense of Holy Scripture The paper that you cite, claiming that the "proposition is foolish and absurd in philosophy" refers to scientific rigor, is written by the same person who gave the interview OP linked (Graney). With all due respect to Graney, his arguments about Galileo come across as anachronistic apologia, trying to interpret the early-17th-Century Church as being interested in scientific rigor, rather than orthodoxy. Recall that the Galileo Affair occurred during the Counter-Reformation, a time when the Church was reeling due to the spread of Protestantism and was obsessed with orthodoxy and stamping out heresy. If you want a more neutral and historically accurate depiction of the Galileo Affair, read Maurice Finocchiaro's writings.