Galileo demonstrated through the observed phases of Venus, in his description of the movements, that the system was heliocentred. His observations of the moons of Jupiter was a bonus. The elipticality of orbits had yet to be discovered, as you point out, John W.

If I recall rightly, it was the fact that the scriptural statements of the Lord stopping the sun in its orbit (sic), to ensure Joshua enough light to complete his battle with the Canaanites, was ipso facto, being disputed by Galileo. Hence, he became material for the Inquisition.

The fact that it was 1992 before Galileo's position was acknowledged correct by J-P ii, seems to indicate they were waiting on a break through proving the Earth is the centre of the cosmos.

Hardly Progressive?

This machine of the Greeks' is certainly intriguing. No word on the inscription statement?

I must agree with Dennis and Antoinio. While the Catholic Church has made some mistakes and in my opinion, continues to make some mistakes, on the whole they have been insturmental in promoting the pursuit of knowledge throughout the world. Scientific truths are held to be true until they are refuted. One need only to look at the various scientifically proven diets that are later proven to be inaccurate or refuted. To paraphrase Woody Allen when he used to be funny, in the future only chocolate cake and cigarettes won't be harmful. I guess that's why we have peer review in science and research.

Can anyone suggest something that the Catholic Church was right about?

It probably has nothing to do with any aspect of the Antikythera device, but it is interesting that at the time the ship is thought to have been sunk, Antikythera was a notorious base of piracy in the Aegean region - one of the worst and largest and best organized. Whether that suggests how the device got where it sank - as plunder - or as part of the navigational and/or logistical equipment of piracy is perhaps interesting to consider, and more in line with reality than Erich van Daniken's theories or questions about the church, centuries later.

Just one question: What did the inscription say?

An example of the many instances where POLITICS slowed scientific progress.
History is not a static study, always evolving with our growing knowledge.

Eben Harrell is a fan of the Divinci Code. Repeating nonsense about the mythical events of the "Catholic Church circa 1400." If enough people repeat an incorrect version, for centuries, .... I suspect any article that repeats a lie is nothing but. Nonsense.

Greek Geeks?

The Catholic Church has made mistakes sometimes, and has been right others, as any other institution in the world. I think its action was far more better than others from some universities, scientists...wich were wrong too. The worst problems of Darwin came from other naturalists, not from any church. I think that people may not mix faith and science, they´re two different subjects.

I can´t believe the machine was an instrument of the boat. We have literally hundreds of greek shipwrecks, and a lot of information of that era, and it doesn´t seem to be a common object, cause we haven´t found any more. Maybe they were testing it...

Since the device was found in a shipwreck, was it perhaps a navigational tool?

In any case, the lack of other examples leads one to believe that whatever it may hve been, it was an experiment, not an artifact of an established practice.

As for the comment of the Catholic Church getting anything right: ask the gnostics. It is confusing at best and at worst dangerous — even fatal — to conflate fact and truth.

Dennis: Are you implying that the church, the Catholic Church didn't demand Galileo to rescind his findings. Are you claiming that the church, the Church of England didn't demand Darwin not to publish his finding upon completion of his "Origin of the Species"? Possibly, you're the one that needs to re-examine history, as historically, the church, the Catholic Church has stifled scientific progress for the consumption by the general populace.

Do the authors of articles ever respond to these comments ? Or is this merely an opportunity to comment on each other's comments and entertain ourselves tangling over tangents such as Science and the Church ? As the most sensible here have asked already:
WHAT OF THE INSCRIPTIONS ?
They would appear to be the most newsworthy element of this story. The object, and the fact that it proved that at least some ancient Greeks possesed a previously unsuspected degree of mechanical sophistication, were already widely known. What is the purpose of writing or publishing about inscriptions "unseen for two thousand years" without saying what was found ?
Or will we have to buy the book or wait for some television extravaganza ?

To Geoff in Dorchester: The difference between a fact and the truth? Statistics!

So many misconceptions, so little time.

The Antikythera mechanism provided a cover story for "Scientific American" back in the early 1960's.

I am not aware of any resistance to Mendel from within the Roman Catholic Church. There /was/, however, considerable resistance from within the scientific community. Biologists, most famously Karl Wilhelm von Nägeli, thought that Mendel's mucking about with statistics wasn't the sort of thing that respectable biologists did, and, besides, it upset the fashionable quasi-mystical view of Evolution-with-a-capital-E that is still to be found today in cheapjack science fiction, ersatz religions, and the less inspired lyrics of the Moody Blues; it resulted in Mendel's work being forgotten for almost 40 years, until it was rediscovered simultaneously by DeVries, Correns, and Tschermak, who each stumbled on Mendel's work after having rediscovered his principles, and nobly gave him the credit.

It was Copernicus's book that I named. The Church had, in fact, let it stand for 70 years before the Galileo affair (though Martin Luther and Melancthon condemned it loudly). It was only censored after Galileo did his level best to get up the Pope's nose, and all censorship was deleted in the next revision of the Index, in 1740-something. The recent re-evaluation of the affair did not concern heliocentrism, but rather the issue of the Church's having over-reacted to Galileo being such a smart-arse.

I am unaware of the Church of England making any attempt to suppress Darwin. (Many individual clergy were upset, of couse, most famously Samuel Wilburforce, but that is not the same thing.)

The reason the Antikythera mechanism is so surprising is that that sort of complex clockwork was not typical of the ancient world, and is the only surviving example we possess.

The mechanism is not likely to have been a navigational aid, because the ability to calculate the positions of the seven known "planets&qu

I am reminded of the Isacc Asimov science fiction short story from the 1940's which attempted to explain a number of advanced items that the Greeks had. In the story a scientist burned out a nuclear reactor using all its energy to send a book back in time which would give the Greeks technology that they could use to improve civilisation and change time - leading to a "better world". After trying to figure how to get the book back and so not disrupt time another scientist postulated that in fact the book was part of the existing time line and that to get it back would cause a real shift in time. Along with Steam Engines - perhaps the "Antikythera Mechanism" was also in the book! :-)

Bless my fellow skeptics!And we are not ignorant of history.

why are the greeks not so ingenious now ?

The object does look similar to an Astrolabe.
Why doesn't the article elaborate on the inscriptions?

Just because something seems more advanced than the norm for a time and place (from our perspective), why do we have to label it "ahead of its time"?
Consider all the knowledge lost from razed libraries, histories still undiscovered or unshared from ancient tomes and ancient oral histories lost in human serial genocide - I would be amazed if WE are not still BEHIND the ancient times in many ways!

Gregor Mendel, Augustinian Abbot, Catholic order, called "father of genetics" for his work exploring the inheretance of traits in peas. His work led directly to the modern science of Genetics.

The Catholic Church got that right.

Using the internet is easy. Try it sometime, Alf.

Whether Mr. Harrell is a fan of the deplorable "DaVinci Code" is neither here nor there. The Church of Rome (along with a good many Protestants) did indeed resist heliocentrism, though not as harshly as the popular image has it, and not for long. (The Vatican, in fact, gave its approval to Copernicus's book after censoring only nine sentences that claimed that helliocentrism was absolutely true, rather than just a possible theory.)

This is not new.
Mr Erich von Däniken did describe the "Antikythera Mechanisme" in his book "Meine Welt in Bildern" alread in 1973. In 1973 the scientific community debunked his theory about the "Antikythera Mechanisme". Today they came to the same conclution as EvD in 1973. Scientists - welcome to the real world.

Gregor Mendel's conclusions were as a geneticist Brian not as an abbott... the church was upset about his work for questioning its version of creation I believe...
Not a very good example old chap.

Copernicus and Galileo did not "conclusively prove" the heliocentric theory. Copernicus merely stated it, and Galileo found one suggestive piece of evidence (the moons of Jupiter). It was proved by Kepler (who corrected their mistaken notion, held over from Aristotle, that everything moved in perfect circles) and by Newton (whose laws of motion and law of gravity provided an explanation that made sense).

If it is true that the Catwolic church only deleted seven sentences from Galileio's book, why did they make him recant, and why did it take them over 500 years to admit that they were wrong.

Establishment scientists, too, also get things wrong because they find it very difficult to go against their beliefs.

Regarding the Catholic Church's repression of truth, Brian's example can be countered with the church's opposition to a later observation by Charles Darwin. Also, you may want to consider the discoveries made by Galileo, which when published cost this scientist a threat of excommunication until he rescinded his findings. Let's face it, the organized religions of the world are anti-science and anti-progress.

What are the inscriptions? Are they labels mentioning the five known celestial objects from back then? Is the one labeled The Sun at the center of the device, and is that where it stays, or can it, too, move as the gears are rotated?

These are a few questions raised by this interesting article. One hopes the scientists will continue to probe and discover, and ignore prattle from those with agendas other than what is real.
Following where evidence leads is the key to genuine knowledge. Imposing belief systems, or any other kind of foregone conclusions, on findings only delays and sometimes destroys any chance of progress in genuine knowledge.

One further word: Mr Von Daniken may inadvertently have guessed something, but this in no way compares to being led to a conclusion, always tentative, by evidence resulting from solid scientific inquiry. The latter is to be preferred, same as one would rather have engineering, not faith, holding up one's bridges.

Paul's comment that the possible use of the artifact as a navigational instrument has a ring of common sense.

But Paul, what's the difference between a fact and the truth?

Chuck,
If the Catholic Church is anti-science and anti-progress, then why, pray tell, was it so involved with founding and running Universities.

Why were so many religious orders so dedicated education?

Why is it that the Pontifical Academy for the Sciences the only example of a religiously sponsored foray in to scientific research, something which no other major religion has?

Why is the Scholastic period so steeped in academic, philosophical and natural science study and research (see: St. Albert the Great and St. Thomas Aquinas)

I suggest you read the article "How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization" found at http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods40.html

Or the various articles found at http://www.silk.net/RelEd/science.htm

Those who claim the Catholic Church is anti-science or anti-progress is ignorant of history.

Chuck,

I'm not denying anything. The Galileo case is well documented and commented on. The problem is, many people point to the Galileo case and say "See, Look, RCC is anti-science!!!!"

Where as if we look at all the accumulated historical evidence, and consider all the scientific work that the RCC or its members participated in, we find that the RCC is far from being anti-science.

Catholics have no problem co-existing with all things scientific. It seems that the reverse is often not true, however. I suggest reading "Faith and Reason" by Pope John Paul II to get a current view on how the Church understands the roles of both and how they work together as intrinsic to humanity.

IN ADDENDUM

As for Peter's rant against the interference of Religion. Last time I looked more people have died or been murdered in the name of atheistic materialism than have ever been killed in war prior to the 20th century.

I think atheists and some modern scientists have more blood on their hands than all of history's religious combined. Case in point: The Nazi and Japanese eugenics programs, as well as the atom bombs at Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the 100 million murdered in the name of Atheistic Communism (shall I go on?).

The claim that religion is the cause of all problems is a feeble attempt to divert attention from the brutality that logically results from atheistic materialism.

AND, as far as I know, I still live in a free country so if I want to bring religion into the discussion the only way you can stop me is to take away my freedom of speech, something I am sure you would do if you could.

The RCC in earlier times was concerned with power not religion - religion was the cloak under which power was exercised.
The most obscurantist period, as opposed to pure oppression, was the last 200 years.
Scientific advances in the 19th and 20th centuries were generally decried, and books were banned to the faithfull until well after 1950, as the one thing that could not be allowed was the hard light of knowledge and reason to shine on the church's attitudes - the Aids scandal is just a hangover of this.
Like most religions there are many good things about the Church at a local level, but like many others it is a religion whose main base is paupers.

Hi all: I happened upon this site, and thought you'd enjoy visiting it as well. http://www.math.sunysb.edu/~tony/whatsnew/column/antikytheraI-0400/kyth1.html

While this is a fascinating read it will of course bring about more questions than answers for the time being. LIke did they radio carbon date this piece, has the site it was taken from been rexamined with up to date marine archeological procedures?When the article was found was it properly and scientificaly catalogued, and by who? Is there any chance this piece has been somehow deposited at this location at a later date? Where on the ship was this found, was it a stationary piece attached to the ship itself or perhaps used like a sextant? Is this hand held,and the inscription found within the article what style of ancient writing is it? So much to learn and so little time.

Darrell,

Blame Alf. He started it <g>.

In the first place, there's a fairish chance that the astrolabe hadn't been invented yet. (No-one knows just when it was -- it could have been anywhere from about 200 BC to 400 AD.)

Far more importantly, you're looking at couple of tiny photographs. The device was discovered over 100 years ago, and has been studied in great detail. It is /much/ more complicated than an astrolabe. It is to an astrolabe what a PC is to a Pac-Man console.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism

Astronomical and mathematical knowledge in antiquity findings ( an advanced Analog Computer not digital, my experise, Slide rules, linear or circular ), has by all standards, been respected by the British Isles, this is why, as true American ( Native American, Cherokee ) and Texan, who worked for NASA division of "start-up" science, now called "nano-tech", Nanotechnologies, the new material science of this 21ST Century, has shown what we thought we new about molecular and sub-atomic theory, was lacking, such as the "Casimir Effect", finally being except by the scientific masses..So when such a unique device, now showing an 3D X-ray ( A Tesla discovery, 1900's constantly over used ionized radiation ) CAT, MRI, etc. aquired Greek inscription, based on the planetary knowledge of the Greeks of that time, and that the devise is "Bronze Age" origin, it was nor ex-terrestial, but terrestial, as science of any advanced civilization older than 500 to a 1000 years than our own, if they do exsist, questionable at best, would have created such a primitive functional celestial mechanism. So when the origin has been determined, possibly not Greasian science, but not alien either, QED

A.k.a. THE ULTRA~TESLAN (Hm)

RA Berman CCSC ( edu, com, cc, gov, mil(cc))
The ULTRA~TESLANs

I believe that I read about this device in Discover magazine or Omni magazine around the year 1982. It is a remarkable machine.

Hi Dennis in Toronto - didn't the church found early universities only to train priests then?

This should be in every newspaper, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_pyramid

I cant wait to see what lies beneath the soil ;)

Why is it never mentioned that Galileo was a nasty man who went out of his way to antagonize a progressive pope who had befriended, encouraged, and trusted him?

Naw...the scientific types want their hero portrayed as pure and shining, and love to take shots at the church and people of faith.

So much for scientific "objectivity". Never let historical truth get in the way of putting their humanist hero up on a pedestal.

CopperNickus, the Bosnian Pyramid may not have been reported in every newspaper, but it certainly was in this one: http://www.google.com/search?q=Bosnian+Pyramid+Scotsman

Wouldnt it be amusing if the inscription said MADE IN TAIWAN

Something that the Catholic Church was right about? How about human nature? Like the stuff about hubris, false modesty, pride, greed, etc.

Why isn't this an astrolabe, used for celestial navigation? SHG

In response to the comments asking for clarification on what the inscriptions say, the researchers will reveal that at a conference in November. The teases...

I enjoyed the information about the Greek instrument, if it is an instrument. I'm not suprised, however, about its existence. Other technology from the period may yet be found.

But correct me if I'm wrong. I think the news article is about a possible technological instrument of the ancient Greeks. I don't believe the article is about the Caltholic Church.

Bruce,

I studied history at SFU in Vancouver and U of Toronto, and it is one of the subjects I can teach at the high school level. My understanding of history is probably more nuanced than those who see history only in black and white, as in, religion=evil, science=good.

A lot of history is interpreted through one's particular ideological bias. The trick is to acknowledge that bias and not to be limited to it.

For example, to say that the middle ages was entirely mysogynisitic would be incorrect because there are the exceptions: for example, 1390
At the University of Bologna, Dorotea Bocchi takes the chair of medicine, formerly held by her father. While at the same time, also in 1390,
London licensing law for doctors requires a university education, thus barring women from the profession.

Therefore we see that while there was, from our perspective, a predominant mysoginistic attitude, an objective interpretation would allow for nuance and exceptions such as female rulers, abbesses, poets, business owners, etc. It would also allow for nuances between the Catholic and Protestant treatment of women, etc.

Same thing with science. While the Church was not anti-science there were times when it felt threatened by scientific discovery because it conflicted with their understanding of faith. What usually ended up happening was a reinterpretation of both as a result of, often heated, debate (at at times censure).

Alf,
the RCC did indeed begin universities as training grounds for their clergy, but as with everything else, it took on a greater role as it began preparing individuals for careers in politics and law as well. Secular rulers decided to build universities to train lawyers and others needed for running the increasingly complex bureacracy of the kingdom.

Dennis in London (nice name btw)
The Church was interested in power, at first, as a means of protecting itself from secular political interference as ha

Dennis,

I realise that the Catholic Church has within the last 2 hundred years has started to behave like Christians.
I also realise that Galilao was taken down into a Dungeon and showed instruments of torture used by the Inquisition ( Thought Police of the time )
That and the treat of death(not excommunication) would be enought for anyone with any sence to recant.

I think millions more people have died , from and because of religion in the last 2 millenia that any " agnosticas ) . Dennis for heavens sake read some history books and not just the self servicing publications of the Church .

Have a nice day.

Bruce

June 7, 2006
As I recall, in the 1990s the Pope did in fact say it is ok for Catholics to believe in evolution so long as they believe God infused man with a soul when he evolved. In other words, the official doctrine of the RCC is that Genesis is bunk. Which I suppose is why its American bishops agreed in writing in the 1920s to cover up the homosexual activities of its priests. The lusty citizens of Sodom trying to sleep with the two angels visiting with Lot and the subsequent destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah are described at Genesis 19,

What was curios about the Pope’s bow to evolution is that it came just a few years after publication of scientific proof of the existence in the Hebrew language version of the Torah, the first five books of the Bible, of accurate predictions of future events encoded in equidistant letter sequences; and the failure to discover such predictions in, for example, a Hebrew version of War and Peace. The difference was that every time a search was made for the name, place of birth, and death of each of 32 Rabbis having the longest biographies in a Jewish encyclopedia, a hit was made, whereas those hits found in War and Peace were consistent with chance, there being more misses than hits by far. See Drosnan’s The Bible Codes or Jeffrey Satinover’s Cracking the Bible Codes.

Since then, an avalanche of future events have been found encoded, not only in the Torah, but in Isaiah and other books. In fact, almost any event we know anything about can be found encoded in the Bible. The statistical evidence in support of the existence of the predictions is as overwhelming as scientific support for evolution is virtually nonexistent.

And so, yes, the Pope is as profoundly antiscientific as the evolutionists, because he is one. What! Evolutionists antiscientific? Yes, and fraudulent, too. It seems that every time the speed of light has been measured, beginning with the first in 1676, its speed has been fou

Hmm. Not really 'news'. It was actually 47 years ago (in June 1959) that Derek de Solla Price, the science historian, wrote an article in Scientific American entitled 'An Ancient Greek Computer' (http://www.giant.net.au/users/rupert/kythera/kythera3.htm ). He concluded that "The mechanism now appears to have been a device for calculating the motions of stars and planets." So it's not really true to claim that "For decades, researchers have been baffled by the intricate bronze mechanism of wheels and dials." Nor can the joint British-Greek research team claim that they are the first to work out that "the Antikythera Mechanism may be the world's oldest computer".

Interesting discussions, but really a one track mind that accords every discovery to the West.
Science was present in the Eastern civilizations long before the west, nameless scientists, mathematicians and astrologers have given the binary calculations the zero and the decimal point. Computers and practically any "modern" science would not exist without the mathematical knowledge that the East has given to the world.
The "Indian" (India did not exist as such) vedas and puranas speak of missile like objects, energy that resembles nuclear power and many other inventions and objects in use were accepted without question, mainly because the west rose and the east declined into a gloom of resignation. There is very little written or discussed about ancient Bharat, the scientists hav e no knowledge of Sanscrit and Pali is still an enigma as far as languages go.
Hasn't history taught us that events are cyclic? Every dog has his day. Being a pet lover I do not grudge this, but fair is fair, give credit where it's due.
One would not say that the Kohinoor diamond was mined in London, even though it is there, because we know otherwise. Similarly teh Antikythera Mechanism could have originated miles away, not necessarily China or India, but who knows?

Indeed it looks much like a navigational tool, doesn't seem to be anything special about that. It looks much like a tool the vikings used for navigation and surveying. A circle with a cross in the middle, u can rotate the cross, and on the edges u can read coordinates. If this is similar I wouldn't blow this out of proportions ;)

On the other hand, if this show that humans originate from planet (x,y,z) in a galaxy far from this, I say it would be quite a discovery ;)

Having been fairly disappointed with the content of this article, I (as many others apparently did) found this subsequent discussion more interesting.

Arguments for the RCC as a stabilizing agent in society are easier for me to digest than any that go so far as to ascribe the brilliance of Western Civilization to the Church's investment in universities. I would concede that in a time when few institutions had the funds or wherewithal to delve into scholarly pursuits, the RCC lacked neither the coffers nor the hierarchy to establish such institutions. That fine minds found there way to these institutions should not be at all surprising, and as such the Church may be credited with fostering scientific creativity.

It's dilemma, in the age of an increasingly educated populace, is how to reconcile its tenets, many of which it fabricated (e.g., the Trinity), with a society that has unprecedented access to information and rightfully has brought to light questions both old and new.

The RCC's stance that condoms are incapable of preventing the transmission of HIV is not based on well-conducted research but is an intrusion of its doctrine into the affairs of health policy and, in this case, has helped to exacerbate a pandemic. It would be impossible to determine how many deaths have followed or will follow from this alone.

Since one entry in this forum went so far as to attribute holocaust and acts of horrendous destruction to an atheistic materialism, let us not ignore the RCC's accumulation of wealth in the face of what has often been a suffering membership. How many other religious sects can boast their own state, replete with opulent architecture and guarded stores of treasure and knowledge? As a counter to the implication that atheism equals the materialistic, immoral, or evil, Buddhism's practitioners are in large part atheists and live and promote a serene and frequently ascetic life. Further, it's been shown that atheists have lower rates of

Let's not confuse the church of medieval times with that of modern times. Of course the Church today is behind much progressive education and so forth. However, this wasn't the case during the time of Galileo, Copernicus, etc. Fortunately, a good portion of the Church has merged with the times.

@ Gerald

Well, if we were talking about ethics or morals then your post would fit. However, we're talking about the scientific findings of Galileo not his wrongdoings.

John in Ohio obviously hasn't heard of the Greek philosophers - he should look up the origin of "hubris" for starters.

Alf certainly started something on this one...my Catholic girl friend thinks that all of the supporters of the RCC have been very feeble in its defence... she can't think of anything herself though!

In item No. 41, tm of Phiadelphia, USA, makes some excellent, near hit, points.
Agreed. Discussion of the article is very informative. Actually, the brilliance of Western Civilization is due to the fact, first and foremost, that it stood on the shoulders of giants. Its 500 year retreat after the fall of Rome was gradually reversed. Islam declined as Europe advanced because of the tyranny of the amams and their fanatical belief in the Koran, for which we can thank the anchor of the RCC’s fanatical belief in the literal Bible. Well, for the most part.

But the key to the advance of the West is found in the Domesday Book of 1086, which documented all of William the Conqueror’s holdings in England. It recorded fruit trees and jeweler’s gold, farmer’s holdings and town holdings, forest and barrels of herring.

Herring is a cold water fish high in omega-3 content, favorable for the growth and development of bodies and brains. The RCC decreed the 40 days of lent to be meat free, requiring the consumption of fish every day. Then there were the meatless days of Wednesday, Friday and Saturday on which even more fish were consumed. Queen Elizabeth promoted fish eating as a wayh to profit from the cod of Newfoundalnd. Add to that the fact that clothing was made of flax and that the flax seeds were fed to fowl, producing high omega-3 eggs, chicken, ducks, and geese. Finally, add the fact that animals were grass fed and thus high in omega-3 content. The result for at least the more prosperous elements of society is very highly developed mental and physical abilities coupled with high energy.

The RCC universities developed from 1066 on. And, as in the days of Nebuchadnezzar (c. 600 BC), the most able were recruited as students. And according to Erasmus (c. 1490s), they were fed a monotonous diet of herring, dried, fresh and salted, day after day, because it was cheap. Instead of fish half the time, the students got it almost all the ti

Regarding the inscriptions: I heard an interview on 6/08 on CBC radio with one of the scientists trying to read the inscriptions revealed by the latest scans. He said that it's a difficult job: The original "accretion" broke into two pieces; then smaller pieces broke off. Their efforts to translate the newly revealed inscriptions are complicated by the facts that not all the ancient Greek words are on one part of the mechanism; and that the ancient Greek words on the instrument are not separated by [spaces], so they have to try to reconstruct the ancient words into coherent phrases/sentences.

I see that my views about the Antikythera Mechanism have been slightly misrepresented. I have never attempted to suggest just where the instrument came from. My work has progressed beyond the stage reported. For my more recent view on how the instrument was arranged, what it might have been and how it worked, follow the web-link. There you will find a bibilography and the text of a lecture given last October, together with two photographs of my model illustrating an elaborate version of my reconstruction.
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/portal/page?_pageid=73,7692654&_dad=portallive&_schema=PORTALLIVE#MrMichaelWright

I'd really love to know what the inscription said. Perhaps a further story focusing on this aspect.

In response to Alf, I can name something the Catholic Church was right about, their initiative to protect knowledge and the written word as well as art during the dark ages. Without it who knows where we would be today. Your question is simplistic.

Your comments about The Church are all outdated. Catholic Fundamentalism teaches the new approach to Catholicism: God can program in three dimensions. This means that He programmed the world, just like Genesis said, ten or twelve thousand years ago. The Flood was sent to make it look older for those who wanted to avoid God. You can get more details on catholicfundamentalism.com And, if you look at the lie committees on that site, you'll find them hilarious.

It is truly amazing how the discussion degenerated! My suggestion is that e-mails should not be composed at 4 AM, regardless of your location.

Many thanks to Mr.M.T. Wright for providing the link to his paper. Far better than a second-hand blurb. Go and read, then come back and discuss the machine. Arguing about the whichness of the wherefore or the cost benefit ratios of superstitions is a waste of electricity.

For whatever it's worth, this "Catholic Fundamentalism" website does not represent the teachings of the RCC on any point, social, scientific, or even doctrinal. (Their statement on the Trinity dated April 6, in particular, is too muddle-headed -- it obviously hasn't even been properly proof-read -- to be taken seriously, but if it /were/ to be taken seriously, it would be strongly suggestive of the Arian heresy.)

Their great contention that "God can program in three dimensions" is muddle-headed, too. Small-o-orthodox Christianity has always maintained that God transcends space, and time as well. God can "program", as they put it, in at least four dimensions! If you /really/ want to reconcile evolution with the book of Genesis, you can believe, if you like, that God created the world as described in the Torah, some thousands of years ago, and then subsequently created prior billions of years of geology and biology, after, and as a result of, the Fall of Man. (But note that that's /not/ a real doctrine -- just an amusing fancy.)

re #1's:
"Can anyone suggest something that the Catholic Church was right about?"

Good lord, man! - The GREGORIAN CALENDAR !!
I am not even Christian but I'd always thank old Pope Gregory and his crew of Mathemeticians and Astronomers - look into it, it's unlikely to be surpassed....

-EGC

I smiled at the comment that the supporters of the Catholic Church have been feeble in its defense because the Catholic Church needs no defense. Its contributions and errors have been recorded throughout history. Let us make our own judgement as to whether on the whole it has been good or bad. More importantly, to me at least, is the notion that these marvelous thinkers Newton, Shakespeare, Erasmus, Luther, and so many others may owe at least a part of their brilliance to a herring and flax. If so, then herrings all around!

Yes Wade but it wouldn't have been nearly so interesting would it ??!!
By the way Eric in Pittsburgh - the Gregorian Calender was devised in 1581 by Aloysius Lilius a Calabrian doctor - credit stolen by the church but what the hell.

What a wonderful conglomeration of comments. Go Scotsman! At the risk of seeming to defend The Church and religion generally, somebody needs to be in tension with what I like to call "rampant science". What I mean by that is the tendency of scientists and engineers to act before enough of the facts are established so that civilization doesn't suffer massive "unintended consequences". The Whole Thing is, after all, a project for and by the people and we need the scientists as well as the mystics. Bless you all, my children!

JG has it right. While Science is a wonderful thing, to give it the prominence of place that it is given is thouroughly illogical. Not everything falls within the realm of Science. (The human will for example).

Antonio, who offers a balanced view of things, falls short though when it comes to understanding how to view Science and Faith. To say that they are differnt does not mean that one cannot inform the other. Contrary to the way many seem to exhibit faith, faith is as fully reliant on TRUTH as is Science. Otherwise one has "faith" in what is false and therefore nonexistent. Furthermore, the realm of faith is the realm of the metaphysical which offers the answer for the origin of the world which Science can never ultimately reach. Although not specifically about science, The Papal Encyclical "Fides et Ratio" (Faith and Reason) is very worth reading to understand how faith and reason are partners of one another and not opposed.

As to Michael's reply to Gerald regarding the innappropriateness of bringing Galileo's attitude into the discussion. Galileo's attitudes did contribute to his problems as attitudes always seem to do and that is what the argument is about, the conflict between the Church and Galileo which some want to believe is nothing more that a rejection of truth by the Church.

By the way, even Bacon was aligned with the Church noting that his ideas were radically false and unscientific and that he had no sufficient proofs.

"the jackboot of the Romans"
Seems this fellow is still pissed about the sack of Constantinople in 1204!

It is more effective to program an individual from as young an age as possible, than to put them to the sword for holding an opinion different than your own, many faiths are aware of this I think, some of which the majority of you may not even consider faiths, the more we learn the less we know, If we could but admit that, are we...any of us so different?...maybe the device recorded the captain's wive's menstrual cycle so he knew how long to stay at sea?

This is a bit of a tangent but Jon, please read up on the Muslim universities in Spain, where Christians, Muslims Jews and others mixed and shared knowledge in a tolerant atmosphere (from 700 AD, before the first Chrisitan ones), and the long tradition of Islamic sciences. Many Europeans only re-learned classical medical science after they'd witnessed it being practised by Muslims during the crusades. Europe + Islam is not the negative equestion you seem to think it is.

I see that there are a lot of religious, scientific and, political comments on the subject. All are ligitmate comments and, justified. One needs to take in all aspects to judge in ones mind, what the Antikythera Mechanism was........or was used for? My only question is, has anyone tryed to replicate the mechansim from the 3-D X-ray's? It might be tough to replicate by reverse engineering but it might be worth a try. Then you might be able to see what it is and does.

Russ "It is more effective to program an individual from as young an age as possible, than to put them to the sword for... " That comment has a lot of truth to it. As for the captains wives theory , :)

Nice thread! Maximum opinion, minimal personal attacks, and even the occaisional interesting datum.

Interesting machine. It does resemble, roughly, other navigational devices. The mechanical aspect seems consonant with the tech level achieved at the Alexandrine schools of the day. What would be hard is accurately predicting planetary positions. That requires the calculus which was not available for another millenium. Although Archimedes might have been able to help.

As far as the sub-thread on the RCC goes, where to start? Personally, I am profoundly, bitterly anti-Catholic and only marginally less anti-Christian. I have nothing whatsoever against Yeshua of Nazereth and whatever his teachings might have been but the various cults marketing "Christ" have totally corrupted whatever that original message might have been.

Personally, I find all the moral and ethical guidance I will ever need in the Golden Rule. And I can find all the "gods" I will ever need in Hawking Radiation.

First, whatever might be cited as the RCC "having done right" is just the "placebo effect". If I tell a crowd that waving my hands and saying "Omini Nomini" at them will make their lives better, some of that crowd will see an improvement. And I can take credit for that.

Second, what the RCC has done wrong is, to use their own terminology, downright Satanic. To take one example from history, the silence of the Catholic Church aided and abetted the Holocaust. Der Hitlerjugend recently stood in Auschwitz and said "Where was God?" My question is, "Where, in 1940, was the Pope?"

For the RCC not to be a co-conspirator, if silent, in the Holocaust, no Camp guard would have confessed his actions to his priest. And no priest would have reported the general facts to his bishop. And no bishop would have reported to his archbishop. And no archbishop would have reported to the pope.

Peter, I had that thought too, of course there's always the chance someone might borrow your tool and create some mythical symbolism around it...by the way all I certainly mean no disparagement of the fairer gender...though I appreciate the vote of confidence Jim...you know the shape of a claw hammer hasn't changed for several thousand years, yet with the possible exception of some of Pink floyds animation it has yet to be deified...granted it wouldn't be quite as attractive as a necklace.

Looks like a celtic cross to me, which has long been considered a navigational tool pre dating Greek culture.

It is possible Rosario, that the captain in question had also created some elaborate mechanism to crack an egg and drop it in a pan...there is without any doubt much of our long and varied history that we have not yet, and perhaps will never discover, or rather recover...You're right of course, many technonogical advances are known to only a few, select or not, even in our time of instant communication, to say nothing of the anchients...But I must say, your last question might be the answer to your previous one...The catholic church had much to do with the destruction of many of those breakthroughs, and the church, not just the catholic church, and perhaps not just the christian church but religon in general, seems to pretty much have a corner on lack of understanding and fear of the unknown...you might even say it's their stock in trade...admire those who seek the truth, fear those who have found it.

I would absolutely love a just a little proof Russ that the Catholic Church has anything to do with the destruction of any "breakthough". What breakthough are you referring to? I would bet that you cannot give even ONE solid example.

Of Christophers comments I would simply say that there is nothing more than a preponderance of emotion expressing itself in words. To reply to such a post would be a mammoth job as it convicts The Church on a multitude of fronts without any offering of proof whatsoever.

Alhough I realize that what I am about to write is a generalization, there is nonetheless some truth contained. It almost always seems to me that those who are anti-catholic are very swift to condemn using brief yet sweeping accusations that contain little if any proof or argumentation beyond opinion; and opinion does not reach the level of truth.

In turn it is the Catholic believer who retorts with the thought out proof or response that avoids opinion. Again this is a generalization but in my expereince genernally true. Posts such as Christopher's are extermely difficult to reply to as they deliver the "outcome" to a host of topics that I am sure can be debated to a quite different outcome.

As a phsycian who has left practicing medicine to enter the Catholic seminar, I must say that the Church has satisfied my quest for truth so that I am at perfect peace in following her lead towards God. In my readings and experience, the post by Christopher falls utterly flat. I would be happy to debate any point he might make, albeit one point at a time.

I am incredulous with the lack of inetllectual honesty that is epidemic in the United States. It seems we are living and dying by the relativity of our opinions that we have made immune to truth or at least an honest attempt at it.

Hiya! I must confess that I didn't read ALL the comments here. I agree with Paul, though, that this was probably was created and used for navigation. Just because one person had the knowledge and capability to create something like this, that doesn't mean that this was widely known or common knowledge. How many visionary inventors and scientists remain unknown because their breakthroughs were forgotten or destroyed, either through lack of understanding, or just plain fear of the unknown? By the way, what does the Catholic Church have to do with this at all?