Trust Septimus, he knows you can know.

Truth changes all the time. Yesterday I was a day younger than I am today.

I'd say, rather, truth is a correspondence a person's judgment about reality and reality itself.

"Truth never changes". "Most people". "Most theists". "In fact". "Most Catholics".
Well, you certainly did a thorough and scientific survey. You should publish it. Such certainty may at first appear as if you pulled it out of your hat, but I'm sure that most Catholics just say that because they're wrong.

You can change your ideas as much as you want, but truth never changes. Nowadays most people remain religious for lack of proper knowledge (v.g. the number of people saying earth is 5000 yo or "why aren't monkeys becoming human in the zoo"). Most theists are, in fact, agnostics, and most catholics say they are out of habit, never actually reading the bible.

Through out Tyson's seemingly random and nonsensical journey from the earth's creation to lead poisoning and global warming, there are numerous plugs for pro-big government, pro environmental regulation, as well as snipes at those who believe in God and Creation. By the end (if you can make it to the end of one of these shows) you are nauseated, lost and befuddled by Tyson's bait and switch. My final thoughts after each Cosmos is "WAIT! WHAT HAPPENED TO EXPLORING THE SCIENCE OF PARTICLE PHYSICS, THE EARTH'S BEGINNING, BLACK HOLES.......?"

I am perfectly fine with an honest discussion about what the Bible says about Creation and what various scientific theories say about Creation, but don't try and fool the audience into thinking the show is about the science of black holes and make veiled attempts to discredit religion. What Cosmos really proves is that smoking pot in the quantities that the creators of this show smoke really does damage to the part of the brain responsible for logical reasoning.

THIS IS AN ERROR !!
One must be very careful of what one takes as assumptions. The second 'a priori' condition above, namely that the world is "imbued with intelligibility" is far from a safe assumption. It may be required for the construct that the world was created by a god, but that is not yet a proven point. If one ASSUMES this point, then proving there is a god is not difficult. Any truly 'materialistic' knowledge system must NOT make this assumption. What is the basis for this assumption? ... Scripture? ... the 'feeling' that it 'has to be so'?
It has often been said that "assertions made without proof can be refuted without proof." If the author wants to make this really bold assertion, we need to see some proof.

all humans sharing one common male and female ancestor

This could mean two things:

(a) there is a couple in the past with the property that every line of ancestors from every living human goes back through them

or

(b) there is a couple in the past with the property that at least one line of ancestors from every living human goes back through them

The first one (a) contradicts DNA research. Which did you have in mind ?

My point is that Sagan's report specifically left out everything in the middle for the purpose of making it look like it was Christianity was solely responsible for the destruction of what he described as existing before the Roman invasion

Wow, that is some statement of fact. You can back it up I'm sure?

Regardless, you could have just as easily have made your point by elucidating the audience here of Sagan's perceived errors. You didn't, you attacked the man's prowess and competancy in history, assuming he did the research himself.

Question: Did the Pope order the destruction of the temple of Alexandria including the library in 391, regardless of events 4 centuries earlier?

Answer: Yes

Sagan was right...end of.

-- a bias Toynbee was happy to promote in his accounts -- when what he described is not what happened.

We don't know for sure all what happened to the library at Alexandria, what we do know is, that what Sagan said is true. Christians, under the orders of the Pope, run amok in 391 AD and left a trail of death and destruction.

My main pertinent point was comparing it to the erroneous historical digression in the current Cosmos.

And you are making the same mistake as the OP. Stating that Bruno was burned at the stake for other reasons than his scientific views is ridiculous when part of the charge report outlines his heretical scientific views as reasons for his trial, conviction and education.

It seems to me that many scientists simply resent the religious roots of science, so try to separate them more than is necessary. I find no conflict between them myself. If the universality of DNA as the structure of life, and evolution, mean that through his incarnation as a human being God physically unites himself with all he created -- that just makes science and religion both more awesome.

Neither "Special creation of man" nor all humans sharing one common male and female ancestor contradict any established scientific fact. By the same token, as Joseph Ratzinger wrote in his treatise "In the Beginning .." the Bible was never intended to be a natural science manual.

So what? How is any of that relevant to your opening comment?

My point is that Sagan's report specifically left out everything in the middle for the purpose of making it look like it was Christianity was solely responsible for the destruction of what he described as existing before the Roman invasion -- a bias Toynbee was happy to promote in his accounts -- when what he described is not what happened. My main pertinent point was comparing it to the erroneous historical digression in the current Cosmos.

It seems to me that many scientists simply resent the religious roots of science, so try to separate them more than is necessary. I find no conflict between them myself. If the universality of DNA as the structure of life, and evolution, mean that through his incarnation as a human being God physically unites himself with all he created -- that just makes science and religion both more awesome.

Neither "Special creation of man" nor all humans sharing one common male and female ancestor contradict any established scientific fact. By the same token, as Joseph Ratzinger wrote in his treatise "In the Beginning .." the Bible was never intended to be a natural science manual.

The Great Library of Alexandria was destroyed by the Romans long before Christianity existed.

The library is famous for having been burned resulting in the loss of many scrolls and books, and has become a symbol of the destruction of cultural knowledge. A few sources differ on who is responsible for the destruction and when it occurred. Although there is a mythology of the burning of the Library at Alexandria, the library may have suffered several fires or acts of destruction over many years. Possible occasions for the partial or complete destruction of the Library of Alexandria include a fire set by Julius Caesar in 48 BC, an attack byAurelian in the 270s AD, and the decree of Coptic Pope Theophilus in 391 AD.

After the main library was fully destroyed, ancient scholars used a "daughter library" in a temple known as the Serapeum, located in another part of the city. According to Socrates of Constantinople, Coptic Pope Theophilus destroyed the Serapeum in 391 AD.

There was another library in Alexandria at the time of the Christian uprising there.

Which was the library of Alexandria at the time of the 391 AD Christian destruction.

Paganism was made illegal by an edict of the Emperor Theodosius I in 391 AD. The temples of Alexandria were closed by Patriarch Theophilus of Alexandria in AD 391. The historian Socrates of Constantinople describes that all pagan temples in Alexandria were destroyed, including the Serapeum. Since the Serapeum housed a part of the Great Library, some scholars believe that the remains of the Library of Alexandria were destroyed at this time. However, it is not known how many, if any, books were contained in it at the time of destruction, and contemporary scholars do not mention the library directly.

The museum and library survived for many centuries but were destroyed in the civil war that occurred under the Roman emperor Aurelian in the late 3rd century ad; the daughter library was destroyed by Christians in ad 391.

The Great Library was not one building, but part of a campus, and not one building.

I read another source that Caesar's burning ships only burned houses near the harbour, leaving the library intact. But there is myth and legend for ya.

In any case, your initial comment was erroneous hyperbole.