Instruct: Classify a given review into positive or negative sentiment.
Query: psychology, not archaeology

This is a sneaky book. Von Daniken expends most of his energy attacking the supposed close-mindedness of the scientific establishment. This tactic predisposes the reader to want to disprove him -- to demonstrate that he or she is open-minded and willing to consider facts that don't agree with a pet theory. This makes the reader let down his or her guard, afraid to question von Daniken's evidence. His evidence? A few dozen seemingly anomalous finds linked together with a liberal helping of speculation and a heavy reliance on arguments from incredulity and a refusal to believe in any coincidence whatsoever. If you insist on reading this book, be as skeptical of his accusations of close-mindedness as you are of his theories (or any theories, for that matter).