I agree. Admittedly, NDT does say “keep in mind, Bruno didn’t have any evidence for his claims. He was not a scientist.” But still, that scene came off as somewhat less appropriate. I think that, on balance, it’s about showing that entrenched systems of power and authority have an active disincentive to take progressive stances, or even allow radical voices to exist. Even if Bruno did have evidence on his side, the church still would have burned him. Were I making that episode, I would have made it more clear that there were good reasons for him being laughed out of Cambridge. He had no evidence, but the scientists’ arguments highlighted were mostly arguments from authority “but Aristotle said”, or “but the bible says”, rather than demands for evidence and argumentation. Even scientists can fall to the trap of entrenched ideas and authority.