''DBT9 you said it was a full text but you added the line. "So...

''DBT9 you said it was a full text but you added the line.

"So in truth, Sagan is saying that the idea of an efficient designer is incompatible with what science has found.''

Can't you see this is a quote from the article I posted?

Here is my full quote, from Post #: 52244323:

• What does the fossil record actually show?
  
  Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29.
  To read the above quote in question and answer format, one would "reason" that a reputable scientist "candidly" agreed that the fossil record itself could support a Great Designer. This designer would be Jehovah according to Watchtower, and his creation would not utilize evolution. If you implicitly trusted Watchtower, then there would be no questions asked on the context. However, it does not take much digging to realize that the quote given completely misrepresents the idea Carl Sagan was actually conveying. He was not making a "candid" admission to Watchtower's version of God.
  
  In the quoted passage, Sagan was trying to explain why, through history, it made sense that humans concluded there was a Great Designer before there was an extensive knowledge of the fossil record. He was saying that humans were not stupid. They were intelligent and reasoning, but they just didn't have all the pieces to the puzzle.
• It is a quote explaining why the quote used by Mr Gordon is a case of quote mining, a misrepresentation of Sagan's meaning and position.
• Why are you ignoring the actual point, quote mining by religious interests, while focusing on some perceived error in composition?
• Once again, Mr Gordon used a quote mined snippet from Carl Sagan in an attempt to support creationism, which is a misrepresentation of Sagan's narrative and meaning.
• That is the point.