Original sentence: , The following book review appeared in the Phoenix Skeptics News (later The Arizona Skeptic) vol.1, no.5, March/April 1988, pp.A New Idolatry: A Critique of Robert Anton Wilson's The New Inquisition.Martin Gardner (compared to the Pope in his views).Model Agnosticism vs.Reviewed by Jim Lippard, The New Inquisition: Irrational Rationalism and the Citadel of Science By Robert Anton Wilson 1987, Falcon Press, 240pp
Edited sentence: He also said that Wilsons' message about avoiding dogmatism was worthwhile, that the book was entertaing but that readers should be careful about taking Wilsons' explanations seriously.Jim Lippard described the quality of research in the book as "very shoddy".Karen Buxton compared Wilson to Martin Gardner, noting that Gardner has written on many of the topics that Wilson writes about in the book, taking very different points of view.Lippard listed inaccuracies about the Esperanza stone, fish falling from the sky and the alleged Mars Effect.She concluded with suggesting a merging of the views of Robert Anton Wilson and Martin Gardner as a possible new approach to science.She mentioned that other reviewers had pointed out problems with the research and that the book needs to be read with care.She pointed out that Gardner doesn't think it is easy to exactly define pseudoscience, nor does Gardner think his ideas are infallible.The book had a large number of typographical errors