Index Librorum Prohibitorum.
Which was first established in the 16th century.
And the work of proto-scientists were often heresies because they contradicted doctrine.
I meant books of Arians and similar ones, about stuff like the nature of Jesus and the trinity. Here is a list of Christian book burnings in the Middle Ages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_burning#Christian_burnings. I know Wikipedia is not a 100% reliable source, but they do not mention any burnings of astrology or Greek philosophy books.
They really didn't like Galileo saying the moon had mountains and craters.
Galileo also lived in the 16th/17th century.
Valmex claimed to have found a solution to a particular kind of equation. His books were burned because the theologians said such equations couldn't be solved.
Sorry, I never heard of someone called Valmex and a quick Google search didn't bring any results, so I cannot comment on this one.
Cardinal Jiminez had a 24,000 book bonfire(probably on a whole range of subjects not just science).
I suspect you meant Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros, head of the Spanish Inquisition. In the 15th/16th century.
Gallileo had the copies of his book confiscated, I didn't hear what was done with them. This was after the dark ages, the church was fighting a losing battle at this point.
Yes, there was quite a lot of that kind of suppression of science you are talking about. But as all your examples show, this was in the late Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. I thought we were talking about the so-called "Dark Ages".
As late as 1800 the church still maintained it hasn't been proved that the earth rotates and it was forbidden to say it did. Their ability to burn books at this time was severely reduced but they kept trying because that's what they traditionally did.
Let's not forget Giordano Bruno, not only were the books burned, the writer was too.
Again, we were talking about the "Dark Ages". Bruno also lived in the 16th century.
That wasn't the good stuff. That's the stuff the church declined to burn.
So you keep saying.
Not at all. The church could write out books by hand with a feather just as well as muslims, but somehow it was the muslims who had the good stuff.
My argument was never that the situation in Europe was as good for science (for need of a better word) as it was in the Muslim world back then. My argument is that it was not as bad, by a long shot, as the Renaissance and "common knowledge" try to tell us.
But how much of that collapse was a result of christianity? This was before the dark ages but notice Rome fell after christianity became the official religion.
And the British Empire fell after women got the vote. Correlation doesn't equal causation.
So? There is know-how from victorian times we have lost, because we discovered better knowhow. There is know-how from the 1960s that was gone in the 1990s and gave the Y2K bug fixers endless problems trying to work around, because in the 70s and 80s we developed better know-how.
But wasn't your argument that the Middle Ages were a primitive time because they "forgot" techniques that earlier ages had? And we didn't only lose knowledge because we had "better" knowledge but also because there wasn't any more use for that knowledge. Europeans in the Middle Ages had no need to know how to move obelisks so it got forgotten. Same as we at a certain point didn't need to know how to build a castle.
I'm not blaming any of this soley on the church - I'm saying the church aggressivly promoted ignorance when the lights went out, persecuted those trying to turn them back on because Jesus.
And I would agree with you if you said about the period your examples actually are from, between the 15th and 17th century. There was a massive movement to suppress science back then. But it was not true in the same extant as "common knowledge" thinks it was in the so-called "Dark Ages".