Is it wrong that I am convinced by it? In history class we talked about how before renaissance humanism started it was very religious and not much was done. Even when renaissance humanism started the church resisted it conservatively. What makes it not true and a bad argument towards the "conflict thesis"? [
I really like qed1's take on the role of the Church and science during the era in question.
Three other threads with less responses are here, here or here.
Regarding The Chart: 1) there was plenty of scientific, philosophical, and political innovation at that time, even just in Europe. And 2) "scientific advancement" isn't something quantifiaible. How many sciences is germ theory worth? We can say we know more, or that development of a foundation is required for more advanced understanding, but... some of that foundation was discovered, or at least started to form, in those misnamed dark ages, and fleshed out during the romanticized Renaissance.
What is "the chart" ? Google gave me nothing.