Pale Blue Dot (Paperback)

"It was of course a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal god and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it"

As for the issue of whether religious types should fear the scientific worldview; of course they should since organised science and organised religion are incompatible as long as religious leaders continue to claim authority on questions which can be experimentally determined (which is proving to be just about everything).

The book is printed on high-quality glossy stock paper that makes the reading even more enjoyable. Unlike Cosmos, Dr. Sagan's other book on astronomy, photos in this book correspond perfectly to the text you are reading. Most photos were taken from NASA archives and are of best quality and resolutions available to human kind at the time. The book ,as any other book written on astronomy, is becoming outdated a bit (published in 1994). This ,however, should not sway you from reading this book at all. You can always catch up on new developments on NASA site. There were some new developments in space exploration that Sagan had no way of predicting. I'll give one example. Author writes about the largest moons of Saturn, Titan, and speculates about its surface and composition. It is now known that Titan contains methane seas. So every time you see speculations in book make sure you research on the topic to find newer information that is readily available.

There is one more thing. In Pale Blue Dot, author gives detailed information on most of the nine planets and many of their moons. However, Sagan decides to omit detailed information on planet Jupiter from Voyager 1 and 2 encounters (not Jovian moons) and explains that Jupiter was talked about in Cosmos.

My whine aside, Pale Blue Dot will endure.

Sagan isn't liked by fundamentalist religious types since he preferred a rational worldview and an open-minded investigation of reality (otherwise known as "science") to religious dogmatism.

Why people like this worry about Sagan I don't know. Einstein believed in God, so if you want a scientific authority to support your beliefs, you can't do better than that. You don't need to worry about Sagan, since even his reputation is much less than Einstein's.

It's also obvious these people haven't read Paul Tillich, perhaps the greatest of all Christian theologians. As Tillich very wisely pointed out, faith that has to justify itself isn't true faith.