Carl Sagan was stupid. He jumped to so many conclusions on subjects for which he held disagreements, that I seriously consider him a prime candidate for my Silly-Willy-Nilly-Scientist award. I agree with you completely about a large God and large universe. Some Christians think the universe is only 6,000 years old, so they disrespect science big time and gain nothing. I have never believed in a small God, either. Sagan was good at talking in generalities and half-truths. My brother told me of one Sagan book critical on the works of others he labeled as "pseudo-scientific." One chapter of that book was later retracted because Sagan misunderstood the subject, largely because he had never read the man's work! Duh!

Sagan was good at creating rifts where there didn't need to be. He was good at the darker side of skepticism—self-indulgent ridicule. And, like a good little warrior, his friend, Ann Druyen, recently in the news, is reacting to the self-indulgent ridicule of so-called "Christian fundamentalists." All of that is non-neutral ego speaking, from both sides of the fence.

James, you said, "You describe Ussher as 'delusional,'" but I certainly did not. You got that one entirely wrong. Never said it. Never intended it. Ussher was a brilliant scholar. If you will re-read what I wrote, you will see that only modern adherents to Ussher's timeline are described as delusional in my discussion of Ussher and his work. Ussher did not know of the findings of modern science. If he had, he might never have published his most famous work. Even Sir Isaac Newton created his own version of a biblical timeline. Either of these great men might have arrived at a completely different timeline because of the "reality" described by modern science. To ignore science is to ignore reality. That is a description of delusion. Ussher never knew modern science, so he was not delusional in this regard.