September 14, 2024 • 51 mins
Progress versus preservation: It's one of the eternal dilemmas found throughout every instance of human civilization. Should we embrace disruptive thoughts and science that challenges our beliefs, or should we cling to the comfort of the status quo? Join Ben and Noel in this week's Classic episode as they explore the tragic and inspiring stories of books that were banned not for racy, fictional scenes -- but for furthering our understanding of the universe and our place within it.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Fellow Ridiculous Historians, Welcome to this week's classic I am
the bullen You or Noel Brown? Sir? Yes? Do you
do you enjoy books? Jeez? Put me on the spot,
why don't you?
Speaker 2 (00:15):
I admittedly have struggled in recent years, just due to
the nature of our job to like really throw myself
into a good book.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
I do a lot of audio books.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
I'm very good at consuming and retaining things, you know, auditorily.
But man, this episode is really making me not take
for granted the right to possess and read a book.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Yes, I'm Max Williams. By the way, I like books too. Yeah, okay,
all right, he is a real reader. All right, Max?
Do you recall this episode from twenty eighteen?
Speaker 4 (00:50):
No, I didn't work on the show until twenty twenty one.
We did do a similar two part episode about when
scientists were persecuted. Despite being right, I'm assuing there's gonna
be a little crossover between that and this episode.
Speaker 1 (01:04):
Yes, and so, without further ado, the Three Times Society
refused to accept new books on science. Ridiculous History is
a production of iHeartRadio. Well. Well, well, we're finally getting
(01:46):
to an episode that we have been looking forward to
for a long long time. Today we're doing banned books.
That's right, you two, Aerosmith, the Story of the Talking Heads,
the Rolling Stones. You talking about Ben Nol. I'm talking
(02:07):
about today's episode, folks. Let's see what you did. I
had to get rid of this joke immediately. Then you're
a fool. I love you. Welcome to Ridiculous History, folks.
We promised that the rest of the jokes you will
hear will be at least better than the one we
opened with.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
That's how you do it. You set the bar low
and then everything is just cake. After that, everything is
just bonus icing. That's the way you and I approach
a lot of things, man, bonus icing. Yes, And speaking
of bonuses, we are, as always immensely privileged to have
our super producer Casey Pegram with us today. And you know,
(02:47):
jokes aside, this, this is a fascinating episode. And this
is a little bit like a list for us.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
Sort of a listical. What does a list make? Three?
Three is the minimum number require to make a list,
which is a rule I agree with but I just
made up back in our YouTube video Dash. Yeah, because
you know, we would have to have shows that were
list based, right, and there would be things where you know,
(03:14):
five is a great number for a list, Yeah, but
three is the minimum. Three is the minimum.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
It almost is like, shit, you didn't want to go
the extra mile and do an even four. The answer
to that today, my friends, is no, we've got a
solid three.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
We've got a solid three. We've got some other things
that might interest you. And this this episode is kind
of inspired by our earlier discussion previous episode on the
dilemma of progress versus preservations. True, So we're talking about
these books that have been suppressed or yanked out of
(03:49):
popular society.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
Literally physically yanked out of children's hands at times, yes,
you know, by constables or something.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
I don't know, right, And now the police, the book
police got it the real Wait, no, no, because I
know what's going to happen in this episode. No, they
are real, and I don't like it. You don't want it.
I don't want that, you don't want none of that.
Thank you for saving me there and all keep your books, man,
got to keep them. So usually when we think of
books being banned, we think of, you know, fictional things like, uh,
(04:17):
the catcher in.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
The Rise to Kill a Mockingbird is one that comes up,
and you know, it's still taught in school, but it
is one that some schools are uncomfortable.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
With, right exactly. But what we're looking at today is
the other side of the genre equation. You see, it's
not just fictional books that get banned, burned, or pulled
from the market.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Yeah, and you could argue that this is, you know,
more important in many ways than banning works of fiction,
which obviously are culturally valuable. But we're talking about hard
stuff here, hard science, science fact.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
Yes, yes, things that literally changed our understanding of the world.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
But to this day, some of these books are looked
at a skance by many. We're going to get into
that too.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
Oh yes, yes, we have we have a great uh,
we have a great example of reference that you found
that we are gonna have to put in at some
point in the episode. Oh yeah, it's gonna be fun.
It's that we're gonna have a musical guest. Yeah, we're
gonna have a musical guest. It's gonna be a not
not the first time, but one of the most enjoyable,
slash disturbing. So who do we have first? The first
(05:29):
band book, Well, it was written by a fellow named
Galileo Galilei Have you heard that song by the Indigo Girls?
I love it. I was thinking of it as we
were going in today atl Hometown Heroes.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
It's a galilet or something something something over a couple
of beers and.
Speaker 1 (05:48):
Howlo till my soul getrived? Can any human be? He
never reached that kind of life then, right, beautiful singing voice. Wow,
well it's cool.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
It's you know, it's an interesting They do a good
job of sort of personifying the quandary the Galileo faced
because he was an innovator. He thought big, He had
big ideas, and that was not particularly popular with many
of the folks in power, especially the church. Because we're
talking about the Copernican view of the solar system, right, yes, yes.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
Heliocentrism, the radical notion that, despite the spiritual implications, the
Earth revolved around the Sun rather than the Sun and
all things revolving around Earth.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
Now I'm a little foggy about why that that being
the Ptolemaic model, correct, Yeah, why does one or the
other imply more or less of a God?
Speaker 1 (06:53):
So the controversy from a spiritual sense is that Earth
and humanity are the protagonists of the universe. Got it,
They're the main characters. That makes sense, you know. Yeah,
so they're the way a child thinks, probably right, or
many adults. That's true. But the thing that was interesting
(07:15):
about this as well is that other astronomers, not just
you know, spiritual leaders, but other astronomers tried to find
what they felt were quantitative arguments against heliocentrism. But his book,
The Dialogue concerning the Two Chief World Systems Toolemaic and Copernican,
(07:37):
was a little too solid to be taken down just
by attempts at rebuttal arguments.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
It's true, and the Spanish Inquisition gets into this game
pretty quick, right in sixteen eleven. They kind of caught
wind of Galileo and him espousing these Copernican views, but
they sort of, you know, kept their distance. They didn't
come a gun and for him right away, and he
was allowed even he had pals in the papacy in
(08:09):
the Vatican who kind of gave him some leeway. I
guess they allowed him to espouse these views as long
as he couched them as being mathematical theories, which is
a theme that comes into play with some of our
other list entries.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
Right, Yeah, they micro managed the pants off this guy.
He originally intended to title this work Dialogue on the
Two Chief World Systems, the Dialogue on the Ebb and
Flow of the Sea, but the Inquisition made him remove
the reference to tides in the title. This is twenty
years later too. They've they'd known about him since the
(08:46):
early sixteen hundred. They had their eye on him, and
they were like, all right, let's see what this rabbel
rouser gets up to. Then, in sixteen sixty, he kept
having complaints filed.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Against him right right for his views and for him
his willingness to openly speak about this and to publish
these works, and he finally had a complaint lodged against him,
a written complaint with the Inquisition, specifically against Galileo's Copernican views.
And Galileo responded by defending his views to a person
(09:19):
by the name of Monsignor Piero Dini, who was a
official at the Vatican. And then he also wrote his
famous letter to the Grand Duchess Christina, basically saying, come on,
I'm just asking questions here. You know, I should be
free to explore the meaning of the universe in existence
without you meddling in my affairs, you know, get out
(09:41):
of my face, Rome.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Right, and let's let's dive into a little bit of
this here. So earlier, Pope Urban the eighth had himself
asked Galileo to argue for and against Heelio centrism because.
Speaker 2 (09:56):
They were kind of personal friends. It was as much
as you can be with a pope, right.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
He asked them to put these arguments in the book,
and to be careful not to advocate Helio centrism, sort
of pull a mainstream news thing, present both sides of
the argument. And he asked for another favor, and he said, hey, Galileo,
can you put my personal views about this in the book?
(10:22):
And Galileo did. But the problem is that the presenter
of the geocentric view that Earth is the middle of everything,
the defender of that in the book is a guy
named Simplicio, not the most complimentary name, and it's like
he has he's some sort of simp simple. Yeah. He
(10:43):
comes off like a adult, yes, a dunderhead, yeah, an
income boop, got it. And Galileo takes the things that
Pope Urban says and puts them in Simplicio's voice, and
so the Pope feels publicly ridiculed and is no longer
a fan of Galileo. G So Galileo gets called to
(11:07):
Rome to defend his controversial writings. He arrives in February
of sixteen thirty three, and he is brought to the inquisitors.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Yeah, and let's also just point out that about a
decade prior or, in sixteen sixteen, he was formally accused
of heresy.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
Yes, already, Yeah, so he was, he was not.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
You know, the fact that he was buddies with Pope
Urban probably is what got his butt out of the
frying pan a time or two. But now he is
literally pissed off the one guy that was going to
help him, you know, dodge the inquisitors. And you know,
no one expects the Spanish inquisition, right, we made it,
We made it.
Speaker 1 (11:50):
It happened. Yeah, he had a pass and Noel, I
think you put it very well when you talk about
how he's almost always skirting by yep, just on the edge,
and when it all comes to a head in sixteen thirties, right,
in sixteen thirty three, that's right, he is interrogating. He's
(12:10):
like seventy. At this point, he's interrogated for eighteen days straight.
They eventually say, look, we're going to torture you if
you don't tell us what we want to hear.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
Well, it's like, what do they want him to say?
I mean, as they want him to confess to what
exactly he's a scientist?
Speaker 1 (12:29):
Like he didn't.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
I don't understand. I think they just wanted him to
renounce his views. I think that's what they were after, right,
They wanted him a printer and a retraction.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
Yeah, he was specifically required in the sentence they delivered
in June twenty second is sixteen thirty three, he was
required to abjure, curse, and detest his heliocentric opinions. That's right.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
They were basically saying that he had made too strong
a case for the Copernican view of the solar system.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
And so what's the outcome here? Right, he's alienated the Pope,
He's no longer under his protection. He does get this sentence,
They tell him to renounce everything. They lay a few
other clauses on him too, But do they kill him?
They what happens?
Speaker 5 (13:17):
Nah?
Speaker 2 (13:17):
They just kind of like do the sixteen hundred's equivalent
of like the old ankle bracelet you know where you
got to you can't leave house.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
That's right, he is on permanent time out. He gets
put on house arrest for the rest of his life.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Yeah, and I think they ban his work outright, mm hmmm,
like like any of it is that right.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
Publication of anything he wrote was forbidden, including anything that
he might write in the future.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
But of course, you know, as smart people are often
able to do, he persevered and did continue to write.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
He figured out how to do it. Yeah. Yeah, and
you have to wonder is that a fate worse than
death to be so smart and so enterprising and be
told that we're not going to kill you, but you
cannot do the one thing they gave your life.
Speaker 2 (14:10):
Meaning now it makes me think of the really amazing
scene in the Tanya Harding movie, which I really recommend.
If you guys haven't seen it, tell you where she
the judge passes down the sentence. This isn't a spoiler
because this was in the news, you know, right. I
think we're good here, and the judge says, you're not
going to go to jail, but you can't skate professionally.
Speaker 1 (14:29):
Anymore.
Speaker 2 (14:29):
Ever, again, you can't compete, and she's just like in
tears and it's like, you know, her conspirators or whatever
they got jail time.
Speaker 1 (14:36):
She's like, just toend me to jail. Just don't. I can't.
If I can't skate, what's the point you know?
Speaker 3 (14:43):
This is?
Speaker 1 (14:44):
Yeah, but as you said, no, he does remain in
the historical record, and the mark he left on the
human effort to understand the world and the universe around
us remains profound and crucial.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Today we didn't even talk about his book The Starry Messenger.
We're using his prototype for the modern day telescope. He
was able to observe celestial bodies and write things down
about them before I believe anybody else.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
Wow, Yeah, that's I mean, that's fantastic. We could do
an entire series of shows on the historical significance of Galileo.
It's kind of a shame that we have to move on.
Speaker 2 (15:25):
It really is that we're moving on to some equally
fascinating territory.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
This may well be the most infamous book on our list,
or the most well known by you know, the average
Jane Joe walking around. For sure. It is on the
origin of species by means of natural selection? Can we
get a crazy sound qu drop.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
Charles Darnwiz perfect Yeah, Charles Darwin, Charles Darwin, Charlie de
I like to call him yeah to his friends.
Speaker 2 (16:06):
Yeah yeah. He was a fascinating character.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
So what did his What did his book ultimately argue?
Speaker 2 (16:14):
No, the crux of its argument was a little thing
called evolution is not the most palatable thing to certain
folks of certain religious persuasions. In the same way that
Galileo's ideas challenged these views, this challenged a lot as
(16:37):
well in terms of, you know, if we evolved from
other more lower species, then we were not made in
God's image.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
Adam and Eves out the window.
Speaker 2 (16:47):
A lot of things kind of go out the window
when you start to buy into his findings.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Right, we see again an analog here or a similar
theme as we saw in the books by Galileo, because
the heliocentric argument is a bit of a kick or
a bruise to the ego of the human species, and
in a way, on the origin of species is also
(17:13):
a kick to humanity because it's saying you are not
this singular thing that was made out of whole cloth.
You are the result of a process that was here
before you and will function long after you were gone.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
It's very true, Ben, And just just a quick little
summary of Charlie. He was a naturalist, a biologist, a geologist,
very very versatile man in his learnedness, and he believed
that all species of life evolved or descended from a
(17:47):
common ancestor. Right, yeah, what was that common ancestor for?
Speaker 1 (17:52):
For man?
Speaker 2 (17:54):
Oh, the primates, the primates, right yeah, all right. And so,
like we said before, this was not met with the
most open arms from religious leaders, and this is a
thing that still goes on today. So let's just talk
about how this work was received when it came out
and what may have led to the idea of it
being a banned book, and then we'll kind of bring
(18:15):
it to modern day.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
Sure, here we go. So first, it's important to know
that Darwin himself identified agnostic, meaning that he was not
a fervent practitioner of any particular religion, especially Christianity, which
would have been very common in his time. Darwin was
considered a pretty affable country gentleman, country gentry, and he
(18:42):
shocked Victorian society at the time when he suggested that
animals and humans came from a common source. Pearls were
clutched right, right. This It wasn't universally hated. It was
just controversial because there was at the time also a
(19:02):
rising class of professional scientists. It was their job to
conduct experiments, right, to be a chemist or a physicists
or so on, and this concept, this non religious biology,
appealed to them and they propagated it. But at the
same time, very powerful people are powerfully offended.
Speaker 2 (19:27):
As powerful people tend to get, their offense has legs,
It reaches outward, it can ruin lives, it can topple
empires and suppress information.
Speaker 1 (19:39):
Right, so let's look at the timeline. He publishes the
book in eighteen fifty nine and it outlines the theory
of evolution. Not long after that the book is banned,
particularly in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge, where he
had been student. So the banning begins soon after the
(20:03):
book is published, and it inspires international debate. The Church
of England reacted against the book, but interestingly enough, Anglicans
supported Darwin's theory of natural selection and saw it as
an instrument of God's design, So they were saying, okay,
evolution can happen because God wants it to.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
Okay, Yeah, that's interesting. It's very adaptable view. I guess
I can appreciate that. But Darwin's research only got more
controversial as time went on, and it started to become
a concern in public schools.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
Oh yes, And this is what's nice about this being
second in our list here is Galileo may feel like
ancient history to some people, right, Charles Darwin may feel
a little bit older too, because the book is in,
you know, the mid eighteen hundreds. But the controversy didn't
(21:06):
like die down in nineteen hundred or something. Oh no,
it continued for a long time. And it continued, especially
here in the United States.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
Even though much like global warming is largely accepted by
the scientific community, Darwin's teachings.
Speaker 1 (21:20):
Were as well.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
And the idea of evolution and natural selection is sort
of the law of the land as far as the
science crowd goes. So, as one would expect, this sends
up in a lot of books, a lot of textbooks
that students are getting in high schools in middle schools
about biology and the origin of life. And that rubbed
(21:44):
certain local governments the wrong way.
Speaker 1 (21:47):
Yeah, no, kidding, and the way that they would phrase
this opposition was relatively fluid. There would be you know,
some of the initial opposition was that this was essentially heresy,
which you can't prosecute people for heresy.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
Yeah, we don't have a Spanish inquisition anymore, right.
Speaker 1 (22:09):
So that argument was pretty much on the level transparent,
This offends our view of the nature of the universe, right,
and people rallied behind this cause it became something that
would be portrayed in pop culture as well. Yeah, big time.
Have you heard of the Scopes monkey trial? Ben? Yes? Yes,
(22:31):
what do you know about the Scopes trials? The Scopes
trials took place in Tennessee, right, and it was a
There are some twists in turngal here to this story,
but the quick summary is that this was almost like
a public trial for whether or not evolution should be
(22:52):
taught in United States public schools. It's right.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
In fact, they had a law on the books in
nineteen twenty five that was called the Butler Act HB
one eighty five. It was the bill that was founded
on the arrest of John Scopes, who was a teacher
in a Tennessee public school, and he took it upon
himself to teach evolution, and that did not sit well
(23:20):
with the Tennessee government, and.
Speaker 1 (23:23):
A lot of people rally behind this because this was
the first trial to be broadcast on the radio.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Yeah, the language of the law was no joke either.
It was described as quote, an act prohibiting the teaching
of the evolution theory in all the universities, normals, and
other public schools of Tennessee. It prohibited the teaching of
any theory that denies the story of the divine creation
of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach
(23:49):
instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals.
Punishments included any teacher found guilty of the violation of
this Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and a
punk viction. Shall be fine not less than one hundred
dollars nor more than five hundred for each offense.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
Yikes. Right, And this is in Dayton, Tennessee. And one
thing that I find kind of wholesome and lighthearted about
the whole event is that there was a carnival sk
atmosphere outside of the courthouse. People were selling hot dogs, lemonade,
toy monkeys. Of course.
Speaker 2 (24:23):
Yeah, in fact, there's a pretty amazing little jingle that
was written around this very event.
Speaker 1 (24:31):
Casey, can we have a clip of this please?
Speaker 5 (24:33):
I'm no kin to the monkey. No no, no, the
monkey's hocking to the Yeah yeah, yeah, I don't know
much of that his and says just that I didn't
swing by my tream seeing so unbelievabove, and yet those
saying it's true, they're teaching us about it in now
(24:54):
that humans where monkeys wants to whoam no ki.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
Ah, sweet sweet catchy ignorance. It is catchy. You have
to give it that. If you just heard that song
and you didn't speak English, you would think, oh, that's
that's got a nice role to it.
Speaker 2 (25:09):
It's got good alliteration. It's like, I'm no kin to
the monkey.
Speaker 1 (25:13):
No no, no, the monkey's no kin to me. Yeah. Yeah, yeah,
it's like a calypso almost. Yeah. It's got, it's got.
It's got some punch to it. Kind of makes me
want to deny evolution. It's working, nol, it's working. You
can't listen to the song in full, they'll get you.
But they also technically got scopes. Interesting fact. He was
found guilty and he was fined one hundred dollars one
(25:35):
hundred dollars. I guess he only did it once. In
the modern parlance, we would say he took an L.
He took that L for all of us. Yeah, he
really did.
Speaker 2 (25:43):
But this, you know this, this was a nineteen twenty
three and this stuff was happening as recently as like
the nineties. In Georgia, for example, there was a Supreme
Court ruling that declared it unconstitutional for the government to
require biology textbooks that contain natural selection, versions of evolution,
(26:04):
and the origins of life. They would have stickers on
them that referred to this stuff as a theory. Evolution
is a theory, they would say, not a fact regarding
the origin of living things. And then in January of
two thousand and five, a federal judge ruled that those
stickers were no good because they essentially endorsed a religious viewpoint.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
And the school board spent a year appealing the ruling
until it finally got settled in two thousand and six.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
Yeah, man, that's insane. I really like this one. In California,
of course, California. In twenty ten, the Supreme Court decided
to not hear the Association of Christian Schools international at
all versus Roman sterns at all. And this case was
an appeal of a ruling that basically said that the
(26:55):
state had the right to consider the teachings of certain
religon just schools insufficient preparation for college.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
That's you know, you've got to respect the way that
people frame these things, because supporters of the measures like
the sticker thing or the idea of teaching intelligent design
hand in hand with evolution into public school Supporters of
these measures say that they are not repressing of you.
They are promoting quote, academic freedom by encouraging students and
(27:26):
teachers alike to think critically and pretty much question everything.
That's a bunch of jib or jabber. I don't know
if it is sincere. Yeah. Yeah, it seems like a
line of bull honky. It seems like there's a whole
stream of huy. But it does go to show that
even even after more than one hundred years, this book
(27:49):
remains controversial, and there are people who will tell you
that it is purposely meant to mislead you.
Speaker 2 (27:56):
You know, sure, even though and hey, no ding on
Christian here, This is just a matter of to me
ignoring clear evidence in favor of stuff that even many
Christians will say that the Bible is a book that
is meant to teach. It has these kind of like
scenarios that are necessarily meant to be read as.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
Literary actual occurrences.
Speaker 2 (28:21):
So I always find it interesting when people are so
stuck in an opinion that they can't see that there's
you know, other information out there.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
And I'm a fan of the approach that those Anglicans
took back in the eighteen fifties eighteen sixties. Things don't
have to be mutually exclusive. You know, your personal belief
system is just that personal right big time. And so
also you have to consider if somebody is an opponent
of a scientific thought like this or a theory of
(28:51):
some sort, going out of your way to suppress it
in this manner makes it so much more powerful and
interesting course to everyone else, you know. Yep, agreed. So
thanks to you, Charles Darwin, thanks for hopping on the
Beagle and changing the course of science for us. All
the Regal Beagle yep, the HMS Beagle. Ah Noel, we're
(29:20):
drawing to a close at least four our massive list
of three.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
I don't know, I think we've done a good job
of expanding it. There have been lists within lists kind
of you know, sub lists, and I have.
Speaker 1 (29:33):
So much other stuff on banning books. I might have
to just like run through it real quick at the end.
Do it if we have time. But what's what's next? Oh?
Speaker 2 (29:41):
Man, Well, Casey, I want I want to I want
you to to give me your feedback on this.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
We're going to talk about George Lemetre.
Speaker 6 (29:51):
That's like George is the master.
Speaker 1 (29:53):
Oh cool, George le Metro. I think I did it.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
Okay, I think you did a great job. All right,
So George, Now I'm gonna know I gotta really like that.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
Wait was this all on Mike? Yeah? Okay, Grace, Yeah,
I don't know. It doesn't have to be Well, this
has been Casey on the case I guess, so it
does have to be that.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
This gentleman Lemetta has the most remarkably unremarkable title of
any of the books on the lists so far.
Speaker 1 (30:20):
Oh I love I love the pants off of it.
Would you like to grace us with this title? Ben Sure?
Get ready a homogeneous universe of constant mass and growing radius,
accounting for the radial velocity of extra galactic nebula by Lametto.
I'm telling you you're nailing that pronunciation. I could you
(30:41):
hear Casey? There was pride, there was in his voice.
I mean that makes me feel really good. So, yeah,
this this gentleman. He wrote this article in nineteen twenty seven.
Speaker 2 (30:50):
It wasn't a book, and this espoused essentially the first
version of what is now referred to as the Big
Bang theory or yeah that one.
Speaker 1 (31:06):
Yeah, that's the automnipia version, right.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
And just to give you a sense of what a
giant of astrophysics this guy was, Stephen Hawkings basically credits
him as being the founder of it all, the godfather
of this idea of the universe exploding outward from a
particle known as what is it a super adom?
Speaker 1 (31:27):
Yeah, or a cosmic egg or primeval egg? Is that
the one? Yeah, that's so cool. Unless we sound like
we're going to be constantly pitying science against spirituality here
we should point out that, in addition to being a
titan in the world of astrophysics, le Maltra was a
Belgian Catholic priest.
Speaker 2 (31:48):
He was indeed every picture you can find the m
he's got his little uh what do you call that
thing little priest collar.
Speaker 1 (31:54):
Yeah, a Roman collar or a clergy collar. There you go.
Speaker 2 (31:59):
Yeah, so he's he is deep in both worlds. My
friend is he is a man of science and a
man of God, which makes his findings extra interesting to me.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
Absolutely, and his religious standing didn't stop the Big Bang
from being looked at as a controversial idea. Even Albert
Einstein at first was like, yeah, are you sure about that?
I don't know about that one, buddy, Yeah, I don't know, father,
And we can, you know, you can kind of understand,
just like just like the case with Galileo or with
Darwin Wild. Yeah, we've never heard this before radical, but
(32:36):
it's such a challenging question that humanity is still trying
to really figure out. You know, what did the universe
have a starting point? If so, what was there beforehand?
You know? And this is mind blowing stuff that this guy,
this guy came up with. And sure we can we
can laugh a little bit at the idea of Cosmic Egg.
It's kind of like Emerson's transparent eyeball, but it's sounds
(33:00):
like a really cool prog rock band, Cosmic Egg. Yeah, oh,
we should tell everybody. So we have been collectively Casey
Nol and some of our colleagues and I have collectively
been really into making up band names or noting when
something would be a good band name. So you're probably
(33:21):
gonna hear us doing that for a while in the
next few episodes. We like to do the band name
and then the genre. So Cosmic Egg.
Speaker 2 (33:29):
Yeah, like I would say, kind of like crowd rock,
like sort of like can you know, very repetitive drumming
and you know, w kind of bass and yeah, like
cal mudy guitars, and yeah, I'm liking that.
Speaker 1 (33:42):
Cosmic Egg. What else? What else you got? I feel
like Cosmic Egg is definitely the superior the three names
for band name, I think I think you nailed it.
Hole in one.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
We had one last night. It was denhim Glut. Remember
Denim Glutz, Yeah, Denim Glut.
Speaker 1 (33:55):
Oh was it the Rainbow Denim Glut.
Speaker 5 (33:57):
No.
Speaker 2 (33:57):
You were just talking about how like you were saying,
there was a den surplus and they were trying to
like capitalize on that by selling it at a at
a loss or something like that, to be a lost
leader or something.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
Anyway over my head. We had a really in depth
discussion off air about Denham.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
I think we decided that Denham Glutt would be kind
of an electro dancy kind of kind of bands.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
Yeah, it had to be because it would be two
on the news for it to be country music.
Speaker 2 (34:23):
I could see, yeah, definitely, only notes. I could see
Denim Glutt opening for Cosmic Egg though. Oh yeah, that
seems like.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
A good bill. Dance the night away. I love it.
So we'll let you know when we make those things
real bands. But in the meantime we should return to
Le Maltra. Le Matra pretty good. You were so much
better at that than I am. It's all about the
(34:50):
Oh god, sorry, guys, choked a little bit.
Speaker 2 (34:54):
It's been a long week. It has been a long Yeah.
Our Belgian cosmologists and Kathleen Priest and you know, let's
talk a little bit about how he arrived.
Speaker 1 (35:06):
At this idea.
Speaker 2 (35:07):
Ooh do tell well, let's start from the beginning. He
was born in eighteen ninety four in Charleroi, Belgium, and
from a very early age he was into both science
and religion. He did serve in World War One briefly,
and then after that he decided to get into theoretical
physics and in short order was ordained so you know,
(35:31):
he really knew his path, kind of a split path,
but an interesting one, and he really committed to both
pretty heartily. By the time he was thirty one, he
became a professor at a Catholic university. And this is
interesting Ben. During World War Two, he actually was hurt
when his home was accidentally bombed by.
Speaker 1 (35:54):
US horses friendly fire. Huh, yeah, that's rough. And the
whole time he is he is studying physics himself as
this is going on, as his home is being accidentally bombed.
In nineteen twenty seven, he discovers a group of solutions
to Einstein's field equations of relativity, and the solutions that
(36:15):
he finds do not describe a static universe.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
That was the prevailing notion, right right, the universe is
just here, that's it.
Speaker 1 (36:26):
But his solutions described an expanding universe. At the same time,
a few years earlier, another researcher, Russian named Alexander Friedman,
had discovered this too, but they were not in contact
with each other. So he brings this. He publishes this
report in the same year, nineteen twenty seven, in a
(36:48):
little known journal oh called all right, hey, Casey, can you.
Speaker 6 (36:57):
Yeah, I'm going to do my best here would be
the anw de la associatissel something like that. My man
bulks somewhere in there.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Yeah, casey on the case, ladies, gentlemen. In this report
he presents this idea of an expanding universe that we
would later call Hubble's law, the idea that the outward
speed of distant objects in the universe is proportional to
their distance from us. This, this is pretty this is
pretty crazy stuff, right. It seems Legit seems legit to us. Now, yeah,
(37:31):
then I know. So we've got a little bit of
a pickle here. How do we get from cosmic egg
to the Big Bang theory. There's there's a story there
that it's called Big Bang theory after a sarcastic remark
from an English astronomer named Fred Hoyle in nineteen forty nine.
It's true. I actually found this article on Christian Today.
Speaker 2 (37:53):
I guess it's written by a British person because I
just love this, they say one skeptical scientist, Fred rubbish
Lemetra's idea as the Big Bang theory, and even Einstein,
like we mentioned earlier, thought it was just.
Speaker 1 (38:07):
Way too far out.
Speaker 2 (38:09):
Man, Oh, Albert Einstein man.
Speaker 1 (38:12):
And that's just too far out. That's how he would
have that's how he actually has happened. Yep, we did
the research on that. Yes, So now fast forward to
the modern day. We are very very fortunate that these
ideas and these works survived despite the way they challenged
the status quo.
Speaker 2 (38:32):
What was it like the discovery of background radiation or
microwaves or something like that, like confirmed a lot of
the basis for his argument.
Speaker 1 (38:41):
That's correct, Nol. That's true. Actually, a while back, I
was able to interview the Nobel Prize winning professor John Mather,
who was instrumental in essentially proving the Big Bang and
taking it outside of the realm of theory. And we
(39:03):
were interviewing him because he was working on the James
Webb Space Telescope, which is the successor to the hub.
That's right when you guys went to NASA. So cool.
Speaker 2 (39:12):
Yeah, And it was actually a pair of scientist Arnout
Penzias and Robert Wilson who discovered those cosmic microwave background radiations.
I am not even borderlines smart enough to know how
that relates or what that means, but Lemantwa did find
this out before his death and he shures, crap, knew
what it meant.
Speaker 1 (39:31):
So good on him. Vindication. That's true. Score one for science.
And you always have to imagine, you know, if we
put ourselves back in these people's shoes. It is so
fascinating to think how much progress they made with so
much less assistance or knowledge in comparison to what we
(39:53):
have today. It's true. Boy. We can only hope that
in twenty four hundred AD or something people look back
and say, I can't believe they made such a great
podcast before the days of telepathic communication.
Speaker 2 (40:08):
You know, if that's our legacy, then I'm fine with that, man.
I'll tell you, Ben, I'm bushed.
Speaker 1 (40:14):
That was a long one. There's a long one. I
sure would hate it.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
If some sort of pedantic supervillain came along.
Speaker 1 (40:21):
Don't do it. Oh, I had so much great stuff
to close out on the dangers of modern censorship, and
now now we're.
Speaker 7 (40:30):
Here, it's time, gentlemen.
Speaker 2 (40:35):
I guess it was only a matter of time before
it was once again time.
Speaker 1 (40:39):
That's right, that's right, fatalism. It's your friend, Jonathan Strickland,
the quizt You've returned yet again, both to challenge our
ability to discern true history from fake history, and to
rationalize all the budget money we spent on that gigantic
Grandfather clock. It's back, Huh, it's always been. Yeah, I'm sorry.
Speaker 7 (41:02):
I am nothing if not an excuse for extravagant purchases.
Speaker 2 (41:07):
You seem like you've kind of taken it down a
notch a little bit, chick.
Speaker 7 (41:10):
I'm gonna be honest. In another day, I'm going to
be opening up at a show, and all my energy
has been devoted to that. So you're kind of getting
the I'm not gonna say a halfway on seven.
Speaker 2 (41:26):
It's usually you're on like thirteen six point two.
Speaker 8 (41:30):
It can be a bit much, right, hang on, hang on, Well, gentlemen,
now prepare yourself now. As I understand it, the topic
for today's discussion was one on bend books.
Speaker 1 (41:42):
Yeah, can you go back to say, yeah, why did
you ask him to do this?
Speaker 7 (41:45):
I'm going to burn through all my energy right now.
Speaker 2 (41:48):
You know, Twister, I gotta tell you, you've become quite
the divisive figure on our show.
Speaker 1 (41:52):
We only forward you the nice emails.
Speaker 7 (41:54):
So there's there's those who really hate it. Well, you
know what I've always said, it's the most cringeworthy segment
in podcasting. I make no apologies. So I have for
you your scenario, and of course you always know that
I always have an arbitrary rule that I in state, yes,
in order for you to ask questions during the three
minutes you have to deliberate, I.
Speaker 1 (42:13):
Will tell you that arbitrary rule.
Speaker 7 (42:15):
After I read you the scenario, so you'll get a
little extra time to think it over. That little extra
time being, you know, the five seconds it takes me
to tell you the arbitrary rule. So here is your scenario.
And yes it's gotten longer. It's just a so erw
it'll soon be its own podcast.
Speaker 1 (42:32):
Here we are. Yeah.
Speaker 7 (42:34):
From the mid nineteen seventies through the nineteen nineties, many
parts of the world, particularly the United States, were gripped
in what we now call the Satanic Panic, in which
people became convinced that cults practicing ritualistic abuse were poised
to topple our world into chaos. Games like Dungeons and
Dragons and music like rock and or roll became targets.
Speaker 1 (42:59):
One town took this a little bit further.
Speaker 7 (43:02):
On June twenty sixth, nineteen eighty nine, Hartford, Connecticut School
Board officials made a big show of fighting against the
forces of darkness by banning several books. Among them was
the Necronomicon. There's only one problem. The Necronomicon does not exist.
It was a fictional book created by H. P. Lovecraft
(43:23):
in his story The Hound in nineteen twenty two. But
apparently no one from Rhode Island told the good folks
of Hartford, Connecticut about this. It took a few months,
but those same officials became the laughing stock of New
England once word got out, and no one ever mentioned
the ban again. Your arbitrary rule is that before you
(43:43):
can ask any question, you must proceed it with ya
ya kutulu photoggin begin the clock, all right, yeah, yeah,
but look at all right, go ahead? That romance.
Speaker 2 (43:54):
I just wanted to try it. I just wanted to
make sure I get remembered it. I had to say
it once.
Speaker 1 (43:57):
Es. Sorry, I'm wasting pressure. I'm sitting fan of lady.
Speaker 7 (44:00):
God's perfectly fine.
Speaker 1 (44:01):
I really would they be that foolish? I mean that's yeah,
they probably would. Yeah, photogon, Yes, mister Bildin. Is it
possible that most of this story is true, but one
part of it has changed? And if so, would that
render the entire thing false?
Speaker 7 (44:19):
If you're asking me, would I make up one detail
to make a true story into a false one, I
absolutely would do that.
Speaker 1 (44:26):
Son of a fish, that's my new family. That's pretty Yeah,
it's fun. That rolls right off the tone. I'm gonna
you know what I'm gonna. I'm gonna double down. I'm
gonna say true. Really yeah, that's okay. So here's the thing.
I'm still divided because these longer ones tend to be fake.
If you look back, you're trying to pick up.
Speaker 7 (44:49):
You're looking for meta informental.
Speaker 2 (44:51):
No, I don't think he would. I don't think he
would tip his hand in that way.
Speaker 1 (44:55):
He hates us, That's that's what I'm saying. I think
he would try to. He's playing those minds games. So
uh shoo, did you okay? I luf. You know I'm
not a native of inn Smith or whatever.
Speaker 7 (45:13):
Right, So you're not so Eldridge right.
Speaker 1 (45:16):
Right, I'm eldritch Light at least. So you mentioned Rhode Island.
I did. How did Rhode Island come into.
Speaker 7 (45:22):
Lovecraft was from Rhode Island, Born in Rhode Island, died
in Rhode Island.
Speaker 1 (45:25):
Went to New York a couple times and it really
screwed with his mind.
Speaker 7 (45:28):
Did not like it.
Speaker 1 (45:30):
Okay, uh yeah, you know what I'm gonna go. I'm
gonna go with true. What do you think? Oh mhm,
surely our time's up? Really we have one minute and
one second. Oh cool, I'm just gonna I'm gonna think
on that. I'm gonna I'm gonna have a good thing,
have a think those having a thing.
Speaker 7 (45:46):
How are you doing? Ben?
Speaker 1 (45:47):
You know I've been doing all right? Man. We we
had a really great episode today and just between us,
it's it's always good to see you, even though it's
somewhat adversarial.
Speaker 7 (45:57):
No, false, al right, So we've got got in the situation.
We know how this has always resolved.
Speaker 1 (46:06):
Rose Shamboo. We're gonna do one two three shoot all right?
One two three shoot all right?
Speaker 7 (46:13):
So we have mister Bullen's got a rock crush. So
we're going with true.
Speaker 1 (46:18):
Then, yes, two ahead, Ben? You food? I have I
made it up, the whole thing, the who thing.
Speaker 7 (46:34):
Well, I didn't make up the satanic panic that.
Speaker 1 (46:36):
Actually happened, that did occur, I'm aware of that was
it in the attic though.
Speaker 7 (46:39):
June twenty sixth, by the way, happens to be my birthday.
That was That was the hint I threw in there,
just to tip it off. Also, you could have there
were I was prepared for all sorts of questions, because
there have been books titled the Necronomicon that were just
various hoaxes. There's, of course the infamous Simon Addition that
(47:00):
was published in the late nineteen seventies early nineteen eighties,
but it only sold about eight hundred thousand copies, so
that probably wouldn't have registered enough to be on a bandabable.
Speaker 1 (47:08):
There's also fan fiction Necronomicon.
Speaker 7 (47:11):
Sure in the early nineteen eighties, that really wasn't such
a big thing.
Speaker 1 (47:14):
And I shouldn't have said anything about that pattern that
I noticed, I know, especially because now he's probably going
to switch it up. Yeah, I was gonna say.
Speaker 7 (47:24):
I also had other books that were supposedly banned in
that same group, in case you asked me that question,
which included things like Satanic Versus by Salomon Rushdie. That's
why I originally had the date set for nineteen eighty five,
But when I put that little detail in, I realized
that book wasn't published till nineteen eighty eight, so I
had to push it back.
Speaker 2 (47:41):
You, sir, are a diabolical creature so good the Pit
of the Abyss.
Speaker 7 (47:48):
Hartford, Connecticut would ban me in an instant.
Speaker 1 (47:50):
You're an agent of the dark.
Speaker 2 (47:54):
Well you know what I had fun too, me too,
Yeah too, hete yong saw thought, what'd you think?
Speaker 1 (48:00):
Get out? That is the elder language that they speak
in the mythos. So thank you for coming on again.
As always the things we were required to say. Uh,
you win the battle, but not the war will be back.
We'll get you next time, my pretty, you have.
Speaker 7 (48:18):
A really long true one for you Next time.
Speaker 1 (48:21):
Death is but time is but a window. Oh happy dagger?
Speaker 7 (48:26):
What's that quote from Ghostbusters to my Lesion madam to
expostulate what majesty should be?
Speaker 1 (48:31):
Why dooty is?
Speaker 7 (48:31):
Why day is day nine nine? And time is time?
Work to nothing but to waste night, day and time.
Speaker 2 (48:35):
That's not in Ghostbusters too, That's a hamlet. I'm sorry
speaking of that, I just want to bragged everybody. I'm
going to see sleep no more tomorrow.
Speaker 1 (48:41):
Night, and I am stoke awesome. You know about this?
Speaker 7 (48:44):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I've heard about this.
Speaker 2 (48:46):
Yeah, it's like a immersive experience where it's like Macbeth
happening in different rooms in this crazy like haunted house
hotel kind of situation.
Speaker 7 (48:55):
It was a similar production that started out in New
York and got a lot of buzz.
Speaker 2 (49:00):
Hey, don't get too familiar, quister. We can't just be
talking theater with the quizter.
Speaker 7 (49:04):
I'm shaking my fist and the two of you, and
now I'll be away by I.
Speaker 1 (49:09):
Just want to say that I think he is doing
a good job. Oh, he's doing a great job. You
are not supposed to be hearing that. Okay, I retract,
I retract that statement. I do want to end with
what I should have said to him. Death is but
a door, Time is but a window. I'll be back
Ghostbusters too. Vigo, it's a great film. His name is Vigo. Wife,
(49:32):
Do you love Paul? To me? Well, will we be
able to come back from our crushing defeat today? Folks,
It's only one way to find out, only.
Speaker 2 (49:44):
One way to find out, and that's tuning in. In
the meantime, you can write us at Ridiculous at HowStuffWorks
dot com. You can hit us up on the social
media's where we are Ridiculous history on Facebook and Instagram,
and you know, most importantly, join us next week when
we talk about how Richard Nixon may or may not
have accidentally smuggled a weed for Louis Armstrong.
Speaker 1 (50:05):
An illegal weed, the drug marijuana. Yes, that's the one.
That's the one.
Speaker 2 (50:10):
But thanks to our super producer Casey Pegrim, thanks to
Alex Williams who composed our theme, curses to Jonathan Strickland
the quizt and thanks to Brian Young for writing three
time Society refused to accept books on new science for
HowStuffWorks dot Com.
Speaker 1 (50:26):
And of course, as always, thanks so much to you.
We hope that you enjoyed this episode. We hope to
hear your take on band books as well as the
dilemma of progress versus preservation. However you approach that one
last question to end on here, I think it's interesting.
(50:47):
Are there any books that you feel should be banned?
And why fascists? See you next time.
Speaker 2 (51:08):
For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Fellow Ridiculous Historians, Welcome to this week's classic I am
the bullen You or Noel Brown? Sir? Yes? Do you
do you enjoy books? Jeez? Put me on the spot,
why don't you?
Speaker 2 (00:15):
I admittedly have struggled in recent years, just due to
the nature of our job to like really throw myself
into a good book.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
I do a lot of audio books.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
I'm very good at consuming and retaining things, you know, auditorily.
But man, this episode is really making me not take
for granted the right to possess and read a book.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Yes, I'm Max Williams. By the way, I like books too. Yeah, okay,
all right, he is a real reader. All right, Max?
Do you recall this episode from twenty eighteen?
Speaker 4 (00:50):
No, I didn't work on the show until twenty twenty one.
We did do a similar two part episode about when
scientists were persecuted. Despite being right, I'm assuing there's gonna
be a little crossover between that and this episode.
Speaker 1 (01:04):
Yes, and so, without further ado, the Three Times Society
refused to accept new books on science. Ridiculous History is
a production of iHeartRadio. Well. Well, well, we're finally getting
(01:46):
to an episode that we have been looking forward to
for a long long time. Today we're doing banned books.
That's right, you two, Aerosmith, the Story of the Talking Heads,
the Rolling Stones. You talking about Ben Nol. I'm talking
(02:07):
about today's episode, folks. Let's see what you did. I
had to get rid of this joke immediately. Then you're
a fool. I love you. Welcome to Ridiculous History, folks.
We promised that the rest of the jokes you will
hear will be at least better than the one we
opened with.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
That's how you do it. You set the bar low
and then everything is just cake. After that, everything is
just bonus icing. That's the way you and I approach
a lot of things, man, bonus icing. Yes, And speaking
of bonuses, we are, as always immensely privileged to have
our super producer Casey Pegram with us today. And you know,
(02:47):
jokes aside, this, this is a fascinating episode. And this
is a little bit like a list for us.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
Sort of a listical. What does a list make? Three?
Three is the minimum number require to make a list,
which is a rule I agree with but I just
made up back in our YouTube video Dash. Yeah, because
you know, we would have to have shows that were
list based, right, and there would be things where you know,
(03:14):
five is a great number for a list, Yeah, but
three is the minimum. Three is the minimum.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
It almost is like, shit, you didn't want to go
the extra mile and do an even four. The answer
to that today, my friends, is no, we've got a
solid three.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
We've got a solid three. We've got some other things
that might interest you. And this this episode is kind
of inspired by our earlier discussion previous episode on the
dilemma of progress versus preservations. True, So we're talking about
these books that have been suppressed or yanked out of
(03:49):
popular society.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
Literally physically yanked out of children's hands at times, yes,
you know, by constables or something.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
I don't know, right, And now the police, the book
police got it the real Wait, no, no, because I
know what's going to happen in this episode. No, they
are real, and I don't like it. You don't want it.
I don't want that, you don't want none of that.
Thank you for saving me there and all keep your books, man,
got to keep them. So usually when we think of
books being banned, we think of, you know, fictional things like, uh,
(04:17):
the catcher in.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
The Rise to Kill a Mockingbird is one that comes up,
and you know, it's still taught in school, but it
is one that some schools are uncomfortable.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
With, right exactly. But what we're looking at today is
the other side of the genre equation. You see, it's
not just fictional books that get banned, burned, or pulled
from the market.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Yeah, and you could argue that this is, you know,
more important in many ways than banning works of fiction,
which obviously are culturally valuable. But we're talking about hard
stuff here, hard science, science fact.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
Yes, yes, things that literally changed our understanding of the world.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
But to this day, some of these books are looked
at a skance by many. We're going to get into
that too.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
Oh yes, yes, we have we have a great uh,
we have a great example of reference that you found
that we are gonna have to put in at some
point in the episode. Oh yeah, it's gonna be fun.
It's that we're gonna have a musical guest. Yeah, we're
gonna have a musical guest. It's gonna be a not
not the first time, but one of the most enjoyable,
slash disturbing. So who do we have first? The first
(05:29):
band book, Well, it was written by a fellow named
Galileo Galilei Have you heard that song by the Indigo Girls?
I love it. I was thinking of it as we
were going in today atl Hometown Heroes.
Speaker 2 (05:41):
It's a galilet or something something something over a couple
of beers and.
Speaker 1 (05:48):
Howlo till my soul getrived? Can any human be? He
never reached that kind of life then, right, beautiful singing voice. Wow,
well it's cool.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
It's you know, it's an interesting They do a good
job of sort of personifying the quandary the Galileo faced
because he was an innovator. He thought big, He had
big ideas, and that was not particularly popular with many
of the folks in power, especially the church. Because we're
talking about the Copernican view of the solar system, right, yes, yes.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
Heliocentrism, the radical notion that, despite the spiritual implications, the
Earth revolved around the Sun rather than the Sun and
all things revolving around Earth.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
Now I'm a little foggy about why that that being
the Ptolemaic model, correct, Yeah, why does one or the
other imply more or less of a God?
Speaker 1 (06:53):
So the controversy from a spiritual sense is that Earth
and humanity are the protagonists of the universe. Got it,
They're the main characters. That makes sense, you know. Yeah,
so they're the way a child thinks, probably right, or
many adults. That's true. But the thing that was interesting
(07:15):
about this as well is that other astronomers, not just
you know, spiritual leaders, but other astronomers tried to find
what they felt were quantitative arguments against heliocentrism. But his book,
The Dialogue concerning the Two Chief World Systems Toolemaic and Copernican,
(07:37):
was a little too solid to be taken down just
by attempts at rebuttal arguments.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
It's true, and the Spanish Inquisition gets into this game
pretty quick, right in sixteen eleven. They kind of caught
wind of Galileo and him espousing these Copernican views, but
they sort of, you know, kept their distance. They didn't
come a gun and for him right away, and he
was allowed even he had pals in the papacy in
(08:09):
the Vatican who kind of gave him some leeway. I
guess they allowed him to espouse these views as long
as he couched them as being mathematical theories, which is
a theme that comes into play with some of our
other list entries.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
Right, Yeah, they micro managed the pants off this guy.
He originally intended to title this work Dialogue on the
Two Chief World Systems, the Dialogue on the Ebb and
Flow of the Sea, but the Inquisition made him remove
the reference to tides in the title. This is twenty
years later too. They've they'd known about him since the
(08:46):
early sixteen hundred. They had their eye on him, and
they were like, all right, let's see what this rabbel
rouser gets up to. Then, in sixteen sixty, he kept
having complaints filed.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Against him right right for his views and for him
his willingness to openly speak about this and to publish
these works, and he finally had a complaint lodged against him,
a written complaint with the Inquisition, specifically against Galileo's Copernican views.
And Galileo responded by defending his views to a person
(09:19):
by the name of Monsignor Piero Dini, who was a
official at the Vatican. And then he also wrote his
famous letter to the Grand Duchess Christina, basically saying, come on,
I'm just asking questions here. You know, I should be
free to explore the meaning of the universe in existence
without you meddling in my affairs, you know, get out
(09:41):
of my face, Rome.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Right, and let's let's dive into a little bit of
this here. So earlier, Pope Urban the eighth had himself
asked Galileo to argue for and against Heelio centrism because.
Speaker 2 (09:56):
They were kind of personal friends. It was as much
as you can be with a pope, right.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
He asked them to put these arguments in the book,
and to be careful not to advocate Helio centrism, sort
of pull a mainstream news thing, present both sides of
the argument. And he asked for another favor, and he said, hey, Galileo,
can you put my personal views about this in the book?
(10:22):
And Galileo did. But the problem is that the presenter
of the geocentric view that Earth is the middle of everything,
the defender of that in the book is a guy
named Simplicio, not the most complimentary name, and it's like
he has he's some sort of simp simple. Yeah. He
(10:43):
comes off like a adult, yes, a dunderhead, yeah, an
income boop, got it. And Galileo takes the things that
Pope Urban says and puts them in Simplicio's voice, and
so the Pope feels publicly ridiculed and is no longer
a fan of Galileo. G So Galileo gets called to
(11:07):
Rome to defend his controversial writings. He arrives in February
of sixteen thirty three, and he is brought to the inquisitors.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Yeah, and let's also just point out that about a
decade prior or, in sixteen sixteen, he was formally accused
of heresy.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
Yes, already, Yeah, so he was, he was not.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
You know, the fact that he was buddies with Pope
Urban probably is what got his butt out of the
frying pan a time or two. But now he is
literally pissed off the one guy that was going to
help him, you know, dodge the inquisitors. And you know,
no one expects the Spanish inquisition, right, we made it,
We made it.
Speaker 1 (11:50):
It happened. Yeah, he had a pass and Noel, I
think you put it very well when you talk about
how he's almost always skirting by yep, just on the edge,
and when it all comes to a head in sixteen thirties, right,
in sixteen thirty three, that's right, he is interrogating. He's
(12:10):
like seventy. At this point, he's interrogated for eighteen days straight.
They eventually say, look, we're going to torture you if
you don't tell us what we want to hear.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
Well, it's like, what do they want him to say?
I mean, as they want him to confess to what
exactly he's a scientist?
Speaker 1 (12:29):
Like he didn't.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
I don't understand. I think they just wanted him to
renounce his views. I think that's what they were after, right,
They wanted him a printer and a retraction.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
Yeah, he was specifically required in the sentence they delivered
in June twenty second is sixteen thirty three, he was
required to abjure, curse, and detest his heliocentric opinions. That's right.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
They were basically saying that he had made too strong
a case for the Copernican view of the solar system.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
And so what's the outcome here? Right, he's alienated the Pope,
He's no longer under his protection. He does get this sentence,
They tell him to renounce everything. They lay a few
other clauses on him too, But do they kill him?
They what happens?
Speaker 5 (13:17):
Nah?
Speaker 2 (13:17):
They just kind of like do the sixteen hundred's equivalent
of like the old ankle bracelet you know where you
got to you can't leave house.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
That's right, he is on permanent time out. He gets
put on house arrest for the rest of his life.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Yeah, and I think they ban his work outright, mm hmmm,
like like any of it is that right.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
Publication of anything he wrote was forbidden, including anything that
he might write in the future.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
But of course, you know, as smart people are often
able to do, he persevered and did continue to write.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
He figured out how to do it. Yeah. Yeah, and
you have to wonder is that a fate worse than
death to be so smart and so enterprising and be
told that we're not going to kill you, but you
cannot do the one thing they gave your life.
Speaker 2 (14:10):
Meaning now it makes me think of the really amazing
scene in the Tanya Harding movie, which I really recommend.
If you guys haven't seen it, tell you where she
the judge passes down the sentence. This isn't a spoiler
because this was in the news, you know, right. I
think we're good here, and the judge says, you're not
going to go to jail, but you can't skate professionally.
Speaker 1 (14:29):
Anymore.
Speaker 2 (14:29):
Ever, again, you can't compete, and she's just like in
tears and it's like, you know, her conspirators or whatever
they got jail time.
Speaker 1 (14:36):
She's like, just toend me to jail. Just don't. I can't.
If I can't skate, what's the point you know?
Speaker 3 (14:43):
This is?
Speaker 1 (14:44):
Yeah, but as you said, no, he does remain in
the historical record, and the mark he left on the
human effort to understand the world and the universe around
us remains profound and crucial.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Today we didn't even talk about his book The Starry Messenger.
We're using his prototype for the modern day telescope. He
was able to observe celestial bodies and write things down
about them before I believe anybody else.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
Wow, Yeah, that's I mean, that's fantastic. We could do
an entire series of shows on the historical significance of Galileo.
It's kind of a shame that we have to move on.
Speaker 2 (15:25):
It really is that we're moving on to some equally
fascinating territory.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
This may well be the most infamous book on our list,
or the most well known by you know, the average
Jane Joe walking around. For sure. It is on the
origin of species by means of natural selection? Can we
get a crazy sound qu drop.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
Charles Darnwiz perfect Yeah, Charles Darwin, Charles Darwin, Charlie de
I like to call him yeah to his friends.
Speaker 2 (16:06):
Yeah yeah. He was a fascinating character.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
So what did his What did his book ultimately argue?
Speaker 2 (16:14):
No, the crux of its argument was a little thing
called evolution is not the most palatable thing to certain
folks of certain religious persuasions. In the same way that
Galileo's ideas challenged these views, this challenged a lot as
(16:37):
well in terms of, you know, if we evolved from
other more lower species, then we were not made in
God's image.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
Adam and Eves out the window.
Speaker 2 (16:47):
A lot of things kind of go out the window
when you start to buy into his findings.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Right, we see again an analog here or a similar
theme as we saw in the books by Galileo, because
the heliocentric argument is a bit of a kick or
a bruise to the ego of the human species, and
in a way, on the origin of species is also
(17:13):
a kick to humanity because it's saying you are not
this singular thing that was made out of whole cloth.
You are the result of a process that was here
before you and will function long after you were gone.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
It's very true, Ben, And just just a quick little
summary of Charlie. He was a naturalist, a biologist, a geologist,
very very versatile man in his learnedness, and he believed
that all species of life evolved or descended from a
(17:47):
common ancestor. Right, yeah, what was that common ancestor for?
Speaker 1 (17:52):
For man?
Speaker 2 (17:54):
Oh, the primates, the primates, right yeah, all right. And so,
like we said before, this was not met with the
most open arms from religious leaders, and this is a
thing that still goes on today. So let's just talk
about how this work was received when it came out
and what may have led to the idea of it
being a banned book, and then we'll kind of bring
(18:15):
it to modern day.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
Sure, here we go. So first, it's important to know
that Darwin himself identified agnostic, meaning that he was not
a fervent practitioner of any particular religion, especially Christianity, which
would have been very common in his time. Darwin was
considered a pretty affable country gentleman, country gentry, and he
(18:42):
shocked Victorian society at the time when he suggested that
animals and humans came from a common source. Pearls were
clutched right, right. This It wasn't universally hated. It was
just controversial because there was at the time also a
(19:02):
rising class of professional scientists. It was their job to
conduct experiments, right, to be a chemist or a physicists
or so on, and this concept, this non religious biology,
appealed to them and they propagated it. But at the
same time, very powerful people are powerfully offended.
Speaker 2 (19:27):
As powerful people tend to get, their offense has legs,
It reaches outward, it can ruin lives, it can topple
empires and suppress information.
Speaker 1 (19:39):
Right, so let's look at the timeline. He publishes the
book in eighteen fifty nine and it outlines the theory
of evolution. Not long after that the book is banned,
particularly in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge, where he
had been student. So the banning begins soon after the
(20:03):
book is published, and it inspires international debate. The Church
of England reacted against the book, but interestingly enough, Anglicans
supported Darwin's theory of natural selection and saw it as
an instrument of God's design, So they were saying, okay,
evolution can happen because God wants it to.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
Okay, Yeah, that's interesting. It's very adaptable view. I guess
I can appreciate that. But Darwin's research only got more
controversial as time went on, and it started to become
a concern in public schools.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
Oh yes, And this is what's nice about this being
second in our list here is Galileo may feel like
ancient history to some people, right, Charles Darwin may feel
a little bit older too, because the book is in,
you know, the mid eighteen hundreds. But the controversy didn't
(21:06):
like die down in nineteen hundred or something. Oh no,
it continued for a long time. And it continued, especially
here in the United States.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
Even though much like global warming is largely accepted by
the scientific community, Darwin's teachings.
Speaker 1 (21:20):
Were as well.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
And the idea of evolution and natural selection is sort
of the law of the land as far as the
science crowd goes. So, as one would expect, this sends
up in a lot of books, a lot of textbooks
that students are getting in high schools in middle schools
about biology and the origin of life. And that rubbed
(21:44):
certain local governments the wrong way.
Speaker 1 (21:47):
Yeah, no, kidding, and the way that they would phrase
this opposition was relatively fluid. There would be you know,
some of the initial opposition was that this was essentially heresy,
which you can't prosecute people for heresy.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
Yeah, we don't have a Spanish inquisition anymore, right.
Speaker 1 (22:09):
So that argument was pretty much on the level transparent,
This offends our view of the nature of the universe, right,
and people rallied behind this cause it became something that
would be portrayed in pop culture as well. Yeah, big time.
Have you heard of the Scopes monkey trial? Ben? Yes? Yes,
(22:31):
what do you know about the Scopes trials? The Scopes
trials took place in Tennessee, right, and it was a
There are some twists in turngal here to this story,
but the quick summary is that this was almost like
a public trial for whether or not evolution should be
(22:52):
taught in United States public schools. It's right.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
In fact, they had a law on the books in
nineteen twenty five that was called the Butler Act HB
one eighty five. It was the bill that was founded
on the arrest of John Scopes, who was a teacher
in a Tennessee public school, and he took it upon
himself to teach evolution, and that did not sit well
(23:20):
with the Tennessee government, and.
Speaker 1 (23:23):
A lot of people rally behind this because this was
the first trial to be broadcast on the radio.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Yeah, the language of the law was no joke either.
It was described as quote, an act prohibiting the teaching
of the evolution theory in all the universities, normals, and
other public schools of Tennessee. It prohibited the teaching of
any theory that denies the story of the divine creation
of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach
(23:49):
instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals.
Punishments included any teacher found guilty of the violation of
this Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and a
punk viction. Shall be fine not less than one hundred
dollars nor more than five hundred for each offense.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
Yikes. Right, And this is in Dayton, Tennessee. And one
thing that I find kind of wholesome and lighthearted about
the whole event is that there was a carnival sk
atmosphere outside of the courthouse. People were selling hot dogs, lemonade,
toy monkeys. Of course.
Speaker 2 (24:23):
Yeah, in fact, there's a pretty amazing little jingle that
was written around this very event.
Speaker 1 (24:31):
Casey, can we have a clip of this please?
Speaker 5 (24:33):
I'm no kin to the monkey. No no, no, the
monkey's hocking to the Yeah yeah, yeah, I don't know
much of that his and says just that I didn't
swing by my tream seeing so unbelievabove, and yet those
saying it's true, they're teaching us about it in now
(24:54):
that humans where monkeys wants to whoam no ki.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
Ah, sweet sweet catchy ignorance. It is catchy. You have
to give it that. If you just heard that song
and you didn't speak English, you would think, oh, that's
that's got a nice role to it.
Speaker 2 (25:09):
It's got good alliteration. It's like, I'm no kin to
the monkey.
Speaker 1 (25:13):
No no, no, the monkey's no kin to me. Yeah. Yeah, yeah,
it's like a calypso almost. Yeah. It's got, it's got.
It's got some punch to it. Kind of makes me
want to deny evolution. It's working, nol, it's working. You
can't listen to the song in full, they'll get you.
But they also technically got scopes. Interesting fact. He was
found guilty and he was fined one hundred dollars one
(25:35):
hundred dollars. I guess he only did it once. In
the modern parlance, we would say he took an L.
He took that L for all of us. Yeah, he
really did.
Speaker 2 (25:43):
But this, you know this, this was a nineteen twenty
three and this stuff was happening as recently as like
the nineties. In Georgia, for example, there was a Supreme
Court ruling that declared it unconstitutional for the government to
require biology textbooks that contain natural selection, versions of evolution,
(26:04):
and the origins of life. They would have stickers on
them that referred to this stuff as a theory. Evolution
is a theory, they would say, not a fact regarding
the origin of living things. And then in January of
two thousand and five, a federal judge ruled that those
stickers were no good because they essentially endorsed a religious viewpoint.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
And the school board spent a year appealing the ruling
until it finally got settled in two thousand and six.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
Yeah, man, that's insane. I really like this one. In California,
of course, California. In twenty ten, the Supreme Court decided
to not hear the Association of Christian Schools international at
all versus Roman sterns at all. And this case was
an appeal of a ruling that basically said that the
(26:55):
state had the right to consider the teachings of certain
religon just schools insufficient preparation for college.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
That's you know, you've got to respect the way that
people frame these things, because supporters of the measures like
the sticker thing or the idea of teaching intelligent design
hand in hand with evolution into public school Supporters of
these measures say that they are not repressing of you.
They are promoting quote, academic freedom by encouraging students and
(27:26):
teachers alike to think critically and pretty much question everything.
That's a bunch of jib or jabber. I don't know
if it is sincere. Yeah. Yeah, it seems like a
line of bull honky. It seems like there's a whole
stream of huy. But it does go to show that
even even after more than one hundred years, this book
(27:49):
remains controversial, and there are people who will tell you
that it is purposely meant to mislead you.
Speaker 2 (27:56):
You know, sure, even though and hey, no ding on
Christian here, This is just a matter of to me
ignoring clear evidence in favor of stuff that even many
Christians will say that the Bible is a book that
is meant to teach. It has these kind of like
scenarios that are necessarily meant to be read as.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
Literary actual occurrences.
Speaker 2 (28:21):
So I always find it interesting when people are so
stuck in an opinion that they can't see that there's
you know, other information out there.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
And I'm a fan of the approach that those Anglicans
took back in the eighteen fifties eighteen sixties. Things don't
have to be mutually exclusive. You know, your personal belief
system is just that personal right big time. And so
also you have to consider if somebody is an opponent
of a scientific thought like this or a theory of
(28:51):
some sort, going out of your way to suppress it
in this manner makes it so much more powerful and
interesting course to everyone else, you know. Yep, agreed. So
thanks to you, Charles Darwin, thanks for hopping on the
Beagle and changing the course of science for us. All
the Regal Beagle yep, the HMS Beagle. Ah Noel, we're
(29:20):
drawing to a close at least four our massive list
of three.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
I don't know, I think we've done a good job
of expanding it. There have been lists within lists kind
of you know, sub lists, and I have.
Speaker 1 (29:33):
So much other stuff on banning books. I might have
to just like run through it real quick at the end.
Do it if we have time. But what's what's next? Oh?
Speaker 2 (29:41):
Man, Well, Casey, I want I want to I want
you to to give me your feedback on this.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
We're going to talk about George Lemetre.
Speaker 6 (29:51):
That's like George is the master.
Speaker 1 (29:53):
Oh cool, George le Metro. I think I did it.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
Okay, I think you did a great job. All right,
So George, Now I'm gonna know I gotta really like that.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
Wait was this all on Mike? Yeah? Okay, Grace, Yeah,
I don't know. It doesn't have to be Well, this
has been Casey on the case I guess, so it
does have to be that.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
This gentleman Lemetta has the most remarkably unremarkable title of
any of the books on the lists so far.
Speaker 1 (30:20):
Oh I love I love the pants off of it.
Would you like to grace us with this title? Ben Sure?
Get ready a homogeneous universe of constant mass and growing radius,
accounting for the radial velocity of extra galactic nebula by Lametto.
I'm telling you you're nailing that pronunciation. I could you
(30:41):
hear Casey? There was pride, there was in his voice.
I mean that makes me feel really good. So, yeah,
this this gentleman. He wrote this article in nineteen twenty seven.
Speaker 2 (30:50):
It wasn't a book, and this espoused essentially the first
version of what is now referred to as the Big
Bang theory or yeah that one.
Speaker 1 (31:06):
Yeah, that's the automnipia version, right.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
And just to give you a sense of what a
giant of astrophysics this guy was, Stephen Hawkings basically credits
him as being the founder of it all, the godfather
of this idea of the universe exploding outward from a
particle known as what is it a super adom?
Speaker 1 (31:27):
Yeah, or a cosmic egg or primeval egg? Is that
the one? Yeah, that's so cool. Unless we sound like
we're going to be constantly pitying science against spirituality here
we should point out that, in addition to being a
titan in the world of astrophysics, le Maltra was a
Belgian Catholic priest.
Speaker 2 (31:48):
He was indeed every picture you can find the m
he's got his little uh what do you call that
thing little priest collar.
Speaker 1 (31:54):
Yeah, a Roman collar or a clergy collar. There you go.
Speaker 2 (31:59):
Yeah, so he's he is deep in both worlds. My
friend is he is a man of science and a
man of God, which makes his findings extra interesting to me.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
Absolutely, and his religious standing didn't stop the Big Bang
from being looked at as a controversial idea. Even Albert
Einstein at first was like, yeah, are you sure about that?
I don't know about that one, buddy, Yeah, I don't know, father,
And we can, you know, you can kind of understand,
just like just like the case with Galileo or with
Darwin Wild. Yeah, we've never heard this before radical, but
(32:36):
it's such a challenging question that humanity is still trying
to really figure out. You know, what did the universe
have a starting point? If so, what was there beforehand?
You know? And this is mind blowing stuff that this guy,
this guy came up with. And sure we can we
can laugh a little bit at the idea of Cosmic Egg.
It's kind of like Emerson's transparent eyeball, but it's sounds
(33:00):
like a really cool prog rock band, Cosmic Egg. Yeah, oh,
we should tell everybody. So we have been collectively Casey
Nol and some of our colleagues and I have collectively
been really into making up band names or noting when
something would be a good band name. So you're probably
(33:21):
gonna hear us doing that for a while in the
next few episodes. We like to do the band name
and then the genre. So Cosmic Egg.
Speaker 2 (33:29):
Yeah, like I would say, kind of like crowd rock,
like sort of like can you know, very repetitive drumming
and you know, w kind of bass and yeah, like
cal mudy guitars, and yeah, I'm liking that.
Speaker 1 (33:42):
Cosmic Egg. What else? What else you got? I feel
like Cosmic Egg is definitely the superior the three names
for band name, I think I think you nailed it.
Hole in one.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
We had one last night. It was denhim Glut. Remember
Denim Glutz, Yeah, Denim Glut.
Speaker 1 (33:55):
Oh was it the Rainbow Denim Glut.
Speaker 5 (33:57):
No.
Speaker 2 (33:57):
You were just talking about how like you were saying,
there was a den surplus and they were trying to
like capitalize on that by selling it at a at
a loss or something like that, to be a lost
leader or something.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
Anyway over my head. We had a really in depth
discussion off air about Denham.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
I think we decided that Denham Glutt would be kind
of an electro dancy kind of kind of bands.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
Yeah, it had to be because it would be two
on the news for it to be country music.
Speaker 2 (34:23):
I could see, yeah, definitely, only notes. I could see
Denim Glutt opening for Cosmic Egg though. Oh yeah, that
seems like.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
A good bill. Dance the night away. I love it.
So we'll let you know when we make those things
real bands. But in the meantime we should return to
Le Maltra. Le Matra pretty good. You were so much
better at that than I am. It's all about the
(34:50):
Oh god, sorry, guys, choked a little bit.
Speaker 2 (34:54):
It's been a long week. It has been a long Yeah.
Our Belgian cosmologists and Kathleen Priest and you know, let's
talk a little bit about how he arrived.
Speaker 1 (35:06):
At this idea.
Speaker 2 (35:07):
Ooh do tell well, let's start from the beginning. He
was born in eighteen ninety four in Charleroi, Belgium, and
from a very early age he was into both science
and religion. He did serve in World War One briefly,
and then after that he decided to get into theoretical
physics and in short order was ordained so you know,
(35:31):
he really knew his path, kind of a split path,
but an interesting one, and he really committed to both
pretty heartily. By the time he was thirty one, he
became a professor at a Catholic university. And this is
interesting Ben. During World War Two, he actually was hurt
when his home was accidentally bombed by.
Speaker 1 (35:54):
US horses friendly fire. Huh, yeah, that's rough. And the
whole time he is he is studying physics himself as
this is going on, as his home is being accidentally bombed.
In nineteen twenty seven, he discovers a group of solutions
to Einstein's field equations of relativity, and the solutions that
(36:15):
he finds do not describe a static universe.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
That was the prevailing notion, right right, the universe is
just here, that's it.
Speaker 1 (36:26):
But his solutions described an expanding universe. At the same time,
a few years earlier, another researcher, Russian named Alexander Friedman,
had discovered this too, but they were not in contact
with each other. So he brings this. He publishes this
report in the same year, nineteen twenty seven, in a
(36:48):
little known journal oh called all right, hey, Casey, can you.
Speaker 6 (36:57):
Yeah, I'm going to do my best here would be
the anw de la associatissel something like that. My man
bulks somewhere in there.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Yeah, casey on the case, ladies, gentlemen. In this report
he presents this idea of an expanding universe that we
would later call Hubble's law, the idea that the outward
speed of distant objects in the universe is proportional to
their distance from us. This, this is pretty this is
pretty crazy stuff, right. It seems Legit seems legit to us. Now, yeah,
(37:31):
then I know. So we've got a little bit of
a pickle here. How do we get from cosmic egg
to the Big Bang theory. There's there's a story there
that it's called Big Bang theory after a sarcastic remark
from an English astronomer named Fred Hoyle in nineteen forty nine.
It's true. I actually found this article on Christian Today.
Speaker 2 (37:53):
I guess it's written by a British person because I
just love this, they say one skeptical scientist, Fred rubbish
Lemetra's idea as the Big Bang theory, and even Einstein,
like we mentioned earlier, thought it was just.
Speaker 1 (38:07):
Way too far out.
Speaker 2 (38:09):
Man, Oh, Albert Einstein man.
Speaker 1 (38:12):
And that's just too far out. That's how he would
have that's how he actually has happened. Yep, we did
the research on that. Yes, So now fast forward to
the modern day. We are very very fortunate that these
ideas and these works survived despite the way they challenged
the status quo.
Speaker 2 (38:32):
What was it like the discovery of background radiation or
microwaves or something like that, like confirmed a lot of
the basis for his argument.
Speaker 1 (38:41):
That's correct, Nol. That's true. Actually, a while back, I
was able to interview the Nobel Prize winning professor John Mather,
who was instrumental in essentially proving the Big Bang and
taking it outside of the realm of theory. And we
(39:03):
were interviewing him because he was working on the James
Webb Space Telescope, which is the successor to the hub.
That's right when you guys went to NASA. So cool.
Speaker 2 (39:12):
Yeah, And it was actually a pair of scientist Arnout
Penzias and Robert Wilson who discovered those cosmic microwave background radiations.
I am not even borderlines smart enough to know how
that relates or what that means, but Lemantwa did find
this out before his death and he shures, crap, knew
what it meant.
Speaker 1 (39:31):
So good on him. Vindication. That's true. Score one for science.
And you always have to imagine, you know, if we
put ourselves back in these people's shoes. It is so
fascinating to think how much progress they made with so
much less assistance or knowledge in comparison to what we
(39:53):
have today. It's true. Boy. We can only hope that
in twenty four hundred AD or something people look back
and say, I can't believe they made such a great
podcast before the days of telepathic communication.
Speaker 2 (40:08):
You know, if that's our legacy, then I'm fine with that, man.
I'll tell you, Ben, I'm bushed.
Speaker 1 (40:14):
That was a long one. There's a long one. I
sure would hate it.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
If some sort of pedantic supervillain came along.
Speaker 1 (40:21):
Don't do it. Oh, I had so much great stuff
to close out on the dangers of modern censorship, and
now now we're.
Speaker 7 (40:30):
Here, it's time, gentlemen.
Speaker 2 (40:35):
I guess it was only a matter of time before
it was once again time.
Speaker 1 (40:39):
That's right, that's right, fatalism. It's your friend, Jonathan Strickland,
the quizt You've returned yet again, both to challenge our
ability to discern true history from fake history, and to
rationalize all the budget money we spent on that gigantic
Grandfather clock. It's back, Huh, it's always been. Yeah, I'm sorry.
Speaker 7 (41:02):
I am nothing if not an excuse for extravagant purchases.
Speaker 2 (41:07):
You seem like you've kind of taken it down a
notch a little bit, chick.
Speaker 7 (41:10):
I'm gonna be honest. In another day, I'm going to
be opening up at a show, and all my energy
has been devoted to that. So you're kind of getting
the I'm not gonna say a halfway on seven.
Speaker 2 (41:26):
It's usually you're on like thirteen six point two.
Speaker 8 (41:30):
It can be a bit much, right, hang on, hang on, Well, gentlemen,
now prepare yourself now. As I understand it, the topic
for today's discussion was one on bend books.
Speaker 1 (41:42):
Yeah, can you go back to say, yeah, why did
you ask him to do this?
Speaker 7 (41:45):
I'm going to burn through all my energy right now.
Speaker 2 (41:48):
You know, Twister, I gotta tell you, you've become quite
the divisive figure on our show.
Speaker 1 (41:52):
We only forward you the nice emails.
Speaker 7 (41:54):
So there's there's those who really hate it. Well, you
know what I've always said, it's the most cringeworthy segment
in podcasting. I make no apologies. So I have for
you your scenario, and of course you always know that
I always have an arbitrary rule that I in state, yes,
in order for you to ask questions during the three
minutes you have to deliberate, I.
Speaker 1 (42:13):
Will tell you that arbitrary rule.
Speaker 7 (42:15):
After I read you the scenario, so you'll get a
little extra time to think it over. That little extra
time being, you know, the five seconds it takes me
to tell you the arbitrary rule. So here is your scenario.
And yes it's gotten longer. It's just a so erw
it'll soon be its own podcast.
Speaker 1 (42:32):
Here we are. Yeah.
Speaker 7 (42:34):
From the mid nineteen seventies through the nineteen nineties, many
parts of the world, particularly the United States, were gripped
in what we now call the Satanic Panic, in which
people became convinced that cults practicing ritualistic abuse were poised
to topple our world into chaos. Games like Dungeons and
Dragons and music like rock and or roll became targets.
Speaker 1 (42:59):
One town took this a little bit further.
Speaker 7 (43:02):
On June twenty sixth, nineteen eighty nine, Hartford, Connecticut School
Board officials made a big show of fighting against the
forces of darkness by banning several books. Among them was
the Necronomicon. There's only one problem. The Necronomicon does not exist.
It was a fictional book created by H. P. Lovecraft
(43:23):
in his story The Hound in nineteen twenty two. But
apparently no one from Rhode Island told the good folks
of Hartford, Connecticut about this. It took a few months,
but those same officials became the laughing stock of New
England once word got out, and no one ever mentioned
the ban again. Your arbitrary rule is that before you
(43:43):
can ask any question, you must proceed it with ya
ya kutulu photoggin begin the clock, all right, yeah, yeah,
but look at all right, go ahead? That romance.
Speaker 2 (43:54):
I just wanted to try it. I just wanted to
make sure I get remembered it. I had to say
it once.
Speaker 1 (43:57):
Es. Sorry, I'm wasting pressure. I'm sitting fan of lady.
Speaker 7 (44:00):
God's perfectly fine.
Speaker 1 (44:01):
I really would they be that foolish? I mean that's yeah,
they probably would. Yeah, photogon, Yes, mister Bildin. Is it
possible that most of this story is true, but one
part of it has changed? And if so, would that
render the entire thing false?
Speaker 7 (44:19):
If you're asking me, would I make up one detail
to make a true story into a false one, I
absolutely would do that.
Speaker 1 (44:26):
Son of a fish, that's my new family. That's pretty Yeah,
it's fun. That rolls right off the tone. I'm gonna
you know what I'm gonna. I'm gonna double down. I'm
gonna say true. Really yeah, that's okay. So here's the thing.
I'm still divided because these longer ones tend to be fake.
If you look back, you're trying to pick up.
Speaker 7 (44:49):
You're looking for meta informental.
Speaker 2 (44:51):
No, I don't think he would. I don't think he
would tip his hand in that way.
Speaker 1 (44:55):
He hates us, That's that's what I'm saying. I think
he would try to. He's playing those minds games. So
uh shoo, did you okay? I luf. You know I'm
not a native of inn Smith or whatever.
Speaker 7 (45:13):
Right, So you're not so Eldridge right.
Speaker 1 (45:16):
Right, I'm eldritch Light at least. So you mentioned Rhode Island.
I did. How did Rhode Island come into.
Speaker 7 (45:22):
Lovecraft was from Rhode Island, Born in Rhode Island, died
in Rhode Island.
Speaker 1 (45:25):
Went to New York a couple times and it really
screwed with his mind.
Speaker 7 (45:28):
Did not like it.
Speaker 1 (45:30):
Okay, uh yeah, you know what I'm gonna go. I'm
gonna go with true. What do you think? Oh mhm,
surely our time's up? Really we have one minute and
one second. Oh cool, I'm just gonna I'm gonna think
on that. I'm gonna I'm gonna have a good thing,
have a think those having a thing.
Speaker 7 (45:46):
How are you doing? Ben?
Speaker 1 (45:47):
You know I've been doing all right? Man. We we
had a really great episode today and just between us,
it's it's always good to see you, even though it's
somewhat adversarial.
Speaker 7 (45:57):
No, false, al right, So we've got got in the situation.
We know how this has always resolved.
Speaker 1 (46:06):
Rose Shamboo. We're gonna do one two three shoot all right?
One two three shoot all right?
Speaker 7 (46:13):
So we have mister Bullen's got a rock crush. So
we're going with true.
Speaker 1 (46:18):
Then, yes, two ahead, Ben? You food? I have I
made it up, the whole thing, the who thing.
Speaker 7 (46:34):
Well, I didn't make up the satanic panic that.
Speaker 1 (46:36):
Actually happened, that did occur, I'm aware of that was
it in the attic though.
Speaker 7 (46:39):
June twenty sixth, by the way, happens to be my birthday.
That was That was the hint I threw in there,
just to tip it off. Also, you could have there
were I was prepared for all sorts of questions, because
there have been books titled the Necronomicon that were just
various hoaxes. There's, of course the infamous Simon Addition that
(47:00):
was published in the late nineteen seventies early nineteen eighties,
but it only sold about eight hundred thousand copies, so
that probably wouldn't have registered enough to be on a bandabable.
Speaker 1 (47:08):
There's also fan fiction Necronomicon.
Speaker 7 (47:11):
Sure in the early nineteen eighties, that really wasn't such
a big thing.
Speaker 1 (47:14):
And I shouldn't have said anything about that pattern that
I noticed, I know, especially because now he's probably going
to switch it up. Yeah, I was gonna say.
Speaker 7 (47:24):
I also had other books that were supposedly banned in
that same group, in case you asked me that question,
which included things like Satanic Versus by Salomon Rushdie. That's
why I originally had the date set for nineteen eighty five,
But when I put that little detail in, I realized
that book wasn't published till nineteen eighty eight, so I
had to push it back.
Speaker 2 (47:41):
You, sir, are a diabolical creature so good the Pit
of the Abyss.
Speaker 7 (47:48):
Hartford, Connecticut would ban me in an instant.
Speaker 1 (47:50):
You're an agent of the dark.
Speaker 2 (47:54):
Well you know what I had fun too, me too,
Yeah too, hete yong saw thought, what'd you think?
Speaker 1 (48:00):
Get out? That is the elder language that they speak
in the mythos. So thank you for coming on again.
As always the things we were required to say. Uh,
you win the battle, but not the war will be back.
We'll get you next time, my pretty, you have.
Speaker 7 (48:18):
A really long true one for you Next time.
Speaker 1 (48:21):
Death is but time is but a window. Oh happy dagger?
Speaker 7 (48:26):
What's that quote from Ghostbusters to my Lesion madam to
expostulate what majesty should be?
Speaker 1 (48:31):
Why dooty is?
Speaker 7 (48:31):
Why day is day nine nine? And time is time?
Work to nothing but to waste night, day and time.
Speaker 2 (48:35):
That's not in Ghostbusters too, That's a hamlet. I'm sorry
speaking of that, I just want to bragged everybody. I'm
going to see sleep no more tomorrow.
Speaker 1 (48:41):
Night, and I am stoke awesome. You know about this?
Speaker 7 (48:44):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I've heard about this.
Speaker 2 (48:46):
Yeah, it's like a immersive experience where it's like Macbeth
happening in different rooms in this crazy like haunted house
hotel kind of situation.
Speaker 7 (48:55):
It was a similar production that started out in New
York and got a lot of buzz.
Speaker 2 (49:00):
Hey, don't get too familiar, quister. We can't just be
talking theater with the quizter.
Speaker 7 (49:04):
I'm shaking my fist and the two of you, and
now I'll be away by I.
Speaker 1 (49:09):
Just want to say that I think he is doing
a good job. Oh, he's doing a great job. You
are not supposed to be hearing that. Okay, I retract,
I retract that statement. I do want to end with
what I should have said to him. Death is but
a door, Time is but a window. I'll be back
Ghostbusters too. Vigo, it's a great film. His name is Vigo. Wife,
(49:32):
Do you love Paul? To me? Well, will we be
able to come back from our crushing defeat today? Folks,
It's only one way to find out, only.
Speaker 2 (49:44):
One way to find out, and that's tuning in. In
the meantime, you can write us at Ridiculous at HowStuffWorks
dot com. You can hit us up on the social
media's where we are Ridiculous history on Facebook and Instagram,
and you know, most importantly, join us next week when
we talk about how Richard Nixon may or may not
have accidentally smuggled a weed for Louis Armstrong.
Speaker 1 (50:05):
An illegal weed, the drug marijuana. Yes, that's the one.
That's the one.
Speaker 2 (50:10):
But thanks to our super producer Casey Pegrim, thanks to
Alex Williams who composed our theme, curses to Jonathan Strickland
the quizt and thanks to Brian Young for writing three
time Society refused to accept books on new science for
HowStuffWorks dot Com.
Speaker 1 (50:26):
And of course, as always, thanks so much to you.
We hope that you enjoyed this episode. We hope to
hear your take on band books as well as the
dilemma of progress versus preservation. However you approach that one
last question to end on here, I think it's interesting.
(50:47):
Are there any books that you feel should be banned?
And why fascists? See you next time.
Speaker 2 (51:08):
For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Ridiculous History News
Hosts And Creators
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Popular Podcasts
1. Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
2. Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
3. Crime Junkie
If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people.