Here is what he says about Evidence and Paul's Journeys:
"My purpose in writing was to get beyond the usual scholarly arguments about the historical evidence, and simply present the evidence itself. My aim was to avoid the irrelevance of much of modern biblical scholarship, which is more concerned with unsubstantiated theories than with empirical arguments. At the same time, I wanted to use the best of that scholarship to establish what can be known about the historical reliability of Luke's account of Paul's travels.
"Quite frankly, the more deeply I studied the matter, the more surprised I was at the sheer amount of evidence that exists in relation to the record of Paul's journeys. Most of that evidence has to do with small historical details. But since Luke had to have knowledge of those details in order to record them, the cumulative effect of hundreds of details being confirmed by that evidence is impressive.
"As I wrote at the conclusion of my book: 'The Acts account of Paul’s journeys is as reliable as we may expect history to be. So far as it can be tested by objective evidence, Acts has proven to be an astonishingly accurate record of events."