Question about when humans started to have souls

[o_mlly]

That basic scientific consensus is readily available all over the internet.

The scientific consensus until late in the 16th century was a geocentric universe. The theories of science are always tentative.

 

[gama232]

Galileo did the wrong thing. He told everyone he was right before all of the evidence was in. He was corrected at the time but he refused correction. He was not vindicated in that sense.

 

[gama232]

Have you read all of the details?

“Galileo could have safely proposed heliocentrism as a theory or a method to more simply account for the planets’ motions. His problem arose when he stopped proposing it as a scientific theory and began proclaiming it as truth, though there was no conclusive proof of it at the time. Even so, Galileo would not have been in so much trouble if he had chosen to stay within the realm of science and out of the realm of theology.”

Source: The Galileo Controversy | Catholic Answers

 

[o_mlly]

Speaking of tentative, here are some actions by the Church in regards to geocentricism: the partial unbanning of Galileo’s Dialogue and Copernican books in general by Pope Benedict XIV (in 1740–1758); the total repeal of the prohibition of Copernicanism in 1820-1835; the implicit theological vindication of Galileo’s biblical hermeneutics by Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Providentissimus Deus (1893); and the partial, informal, and ambiguous rehabilitation of Galileo by Pope John Paul II (in 1979-1992).

Maurice A. Finocchiaro? Here’s the link from which I suspect you copied the above: February 2016: 400 Years Ago the Catholic Church Prohibited Copernicanism | Origins: Current Events in Historical Perspective

The actions you note as tentative, the author reports rather as progressively corrective:

The past four centuries have also witnessed a series of attempts by the Church to undo its original actions.

The Church did not face off against a consensus of scientific opinion as Finocchiaro notes in the same article:

The objections to the geokinetic and heliocentric idea involved astronomical observations, the physics of motion, biblical passages, and epistemological principles (e.g., the reliability of human senses, which reveal a stationary earth). Copernicus did not really refute these objections, but he elaborated a novel and important astronomical argument. Thus, Copernicanism attracted few followers. At first, Galileo himself was not one of them, although he was interested because his new physics enabled him to answer the mechanical objections.

 

[EndTimes]

What do you object to here? This is verifiable, testable data. Rejecting it is rejecting science.

Yes… And Claiming Evolution from a Common Ancestor is true?

Is UnVerifiable… UnTestable - even from any Human sporting a degree in biology…

Although these numbers vary between e.g., 96% and 98.5%

• the point is - Chimps are not almost 100% Human…
  in what makes Humans Human and Not Chimps …

Genes are akin to varying LEGO Building Blocks.

A Genome is as a construction of Genes… Drawn from a SuperSet

Leave out more of the Human Genome? … And you have a Worm… More? A Yeast

 

[gama232]

So you didn’t read it? Fair enough…

 

[EndTimes]

Speaking of tentative, here are some actions by the Church in regards to geocentricism:

Just as the Enemy’s attacks on Inquisition - contain grave falsity

The Galileo Affair - is very rarely ever presented in its full unadulterated form

Thing is … even Copernicus’ HelioCentrism is Wrong - (Sun Center of Universe)

 

[Dimmesdale]

I think the key differentiation is, the point at which moral capability is instantiated. What makes us completely different from other animals is our ability to make ethical decisions. Animals can empathize and care for their young, or eat each other - but they cannot go against their consciences and willingly do evil, knowingly do wrong. It seems only humans can do that. And so, what gives? Why are humans so unique? It seems to suggest there is something within our essence that evolution cannot account for. Or perhaps it can, but I am yet to be fully convinced.