Science & Censorship Hearing Begins

Mar 25, 2009
Topic: Update

6:00-Sarah Hicks is now testifying, talking about how at Rice University, while obtaining her Ph.D., on full scholarship.  She is now talking about one of her fellow grad student, who was forced out of Rice University because of his questioning of evolution.  Wow. So no critical questions in high school, and not in Grad school either?  Even Ph.D. students?  That’s pretty bad.

5:54-Hiram is testifying, talking about us suing governmental entities, talking about Rep. Rob Eissler, signing letter signed by 30 other legislators, supporting the strengths and weaknesses.  He’s now moved to science, talking about Black Hole Thoery, Copernicus, theories that have weaknesses.  Now he’s talking law.  Now science, in physics class, kid raises hand and asks about gaps in the fossil record, and teacher says no, can’t talk about this.  It violate SCOTUS case of West Virginia v. Barnette.

Big problem-Monell case, policy makers held responsible to decision made if a lawsuit comes up. In 20 years, no litigation, so you’re safe.  If you change the language, who knows what courts will say know.   And then SBOE is one the hook as responsible for the state being sued.  Ouch, that’s a lot of responsibility just to make anti-freedom folks and Atheists from California happy?

And the clouds are descending on Austin and the Evolutionists as this testimony makes the SBOE and others very nervous.  Oh, and there is actually real clouds, and thunder, and rain arriving in Austin.  Coincidence.  I think their effort to remove the strengths and weaknesses is in real trouble.

5:40-I am noticing at least one media outlet is falsely claiming that we are trying to put Creationism and Intelligent Design in the classroom.  Big lie.  This is typical of the Austin media to make up these false claims to seel interest in the story.  We were never asked if we belieived such.  Just more evidence the liberal media has to attack us and lie because they know the other side doesn’t have a leg to stand on in regards to the merits of their argument.

5:30 Listen Live-http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us   Scroll down and click the link in the middle 

5:25 Eugenie Scott from California is now testifying.  Her group is the NCSE, extremely hostile to any critical questions of the thoery of evolution.  I guess she wants to bring California’s disaster to our state.  No, thanks, we’re doing just fine, without a multi-billion dollar state deficit.  “There are unknown, non understood information about all theories.”

5:20-Our Director of Litigation is due to testify any minute now. 

5:00 Attorney, Kelly Coghlan just made some interesting legal arguments about why removing the strengths and weaknesses language make the state vulnerable to lawsuits.

3:00-Mrs. Arlington/Mrs. Texas testifying in favor of strengths and weaknesses.  Very well spoken, an aspiring teacher herself.  She timed her testimony perfect, right down to the ring of the bell. 
——————————————————————————–
2:30 p.m. – During the break, Texas Freedom Network passed a little note to Pat Hardy.  Nice try, TFN; we’re sure this isn’t the first time Pat Hardy has listened to TFN’s advice.  Her constituents are starting to ask her about this cozy relationship as well.  Reminder: TFN is the group started by Cecile Richards, head of Planned Parenthood, and former Chief of Staff for Nancy Pelosi.
——————————————————————————–
1:18 p.m.-Teacher Workgroup member is testifying.  Says there was probably not one issue that there was unanimous agreement on.  This is the group of unelected folks who recommended (but not unanimously) that the “strengths and weaknesses” language be stripped out.  Said workgroup members would look at the “pros and cons” of issues.  Did he mean strengths and weaknesses?
——————————————————————————–
1:15 p.m.-Pat Hardy and Rick Agosto are now present, haven’t seen Mary Helen Berlanga yet.
——————————————————————————–
12:41 p.m.-Woman from textbook publisher is testifying. She has admitted that if the TEKS have “analyze and evaluate” instead of  “strengths and weaknesses” would be ambiguous language that would leave textbook publishers uncertain about what can be included in science textbooks.  Wow, that’s strong evidence for us.
———————————————————————————
The hearing has now begun.  We completed our press conference about a half hour ago, with the full attention of the media.  Our science and education friends did well at the press conference, and Hiram Sasser, our Litigation Director also added positive points to this issue.  Someone tried to take over our press conference and shout down me and other members of the media when we began the question and answer time.  We diffused him quickly but he kept on and finally relented and allowed media members to ask questions.  The opposition had their press conference thereafter.

So far, Pat Hardy, Mary Helen Berlanga, and Rick Agosto are the only board members not in attendance.

Share this: