[shroudie]

I understand that it is a pretty good book. I have not read it but I am roughly familiar with it. Perhaps on vacation this summer, I can get around to reading it.

While I don’t share Sagan’s skepticism about God, Christianity, and miracles, I do appreciate his sense of rational thinking. He is a good thinker but he does tend to generalize and lump completely illogical, non-theological topics like UFO’s with matters relating to the divine and divine action in the world.

He is a champion of scientific method and factual based thinking. Sir, you are not. I did read "Shadows," which he wrote with his wife, several years ago and I cannot imagine Sagan, even though he was a fundamentalist-atheist, suggesting that we accept results of faulty testing.

[orionblamblam]

> I understand that it is a pretty good book.

It is indeed, along with Shermer's "Why People Believe Weird Things" and Randi's "Flim Flam!"

> He is a champion of scientific method and factual based thinking. Sir, you are not.

Yawn. It was wrong the first time you said it, it's a lie now. You just don't like the fact that I do not accept that the shroud is 2K years old based on your complete lack of evidence. As I've pointed out earlier, the sum total of my recordable life and career points to the scientific method in action.

But why I'm trying to justify my self to *you*... Shrug, I dunno. Boredom, I guess.