Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
To show you just how ridiculous Texas Board of Education chairman Don McLeroy is, take a look at this report from the Texas Freedom Network on a book he recently endorsed.
Is that the sort of message Chairman Don McLeroy and his cohorts on the State Board of Education have in mind for Texas science classrooms if they succeed in their campaign to shoehorn "weaknesses" of evolution back into the science curriculum standards? That's certainly the message of a new book McLeroy is now endorsing.Dr. McLeroy - noting his position as board chair - recently wrote a glowing recommendation of Sowing Atheism: The National Academy of Sciences' Sinister Scheme to Teach Our Children They're Descended from Reptiles by Robert Bowie Johnson, Jr. (The new book is self-published.)
You can see McLeroy's glowing recommendation here.
In the current culture war over science education and the teaching of evolution, Bob Johnson's Sowing Atheism provides a unique and insightful perspective. In critiquing the National Academy of Science's (NAS) missionary evolution tract--Science, Evolution and Creationism, 2008, he identifies their theft of true science by their intentional neglect of other valid scientific possibilities. Then, using NAS's own statements, he demonstrates that the great "process" of evolution--natural selection--is nothing more than a figure of speech. These chapters alone are worth the reading of this book.Next he shows how the NAS attempts to seduce the unwitting reader by providing scanty empirical evidence but presented with great intellectual bullying--both secular and religious. He actually embarrasses the NAS with a long list of their quotes where they make the obvious claim that evolutionists believe in evolution. He then shines light on the Clergy Letter Project, again showing the obvious--theistic evolutionists believe in evolution.
Again, Sowing Atheism brings a unique perspective to an always interesting debate; advocates for both sides should find the book intriguing. The questions it raises are important; they deserve a hearing.
Don McLeroy
Chair, Texas State Board of Education
9277 Brookwater Circle
College Station, Texas 77845
Wait till you see some of what is in this book:
Their arbitrary staining, or tainting, of all nature with their atheism is an important part of their "scientific method." The hierarchy of the NAS has stolen true science; they are sacrificing our children to their atheism, and at the same time, destroying our children's faith in God. (p. 27)What are they doing coming into all of our elementary schools, all of our junior highs, and all of our high schools with a disguised demand that our children embrace their evoatheism? What are they doing teaching our children that they are descended from worms and reptiles? What are they doing imposing their atheistic religious faith on our children when we're not around? What are they doing sowing atheism in our schools? (p. 88-89)
The NAS hierarchy knows how ugly their atheism looks to the God-fearing citizens of America, so they've got to smear a lot of lipstick on their atheist hog. They use liberal, apostate Christianity for that purpose without, of course, using the words "liberal" or "apostate." (p. 52)
The Greek word translated as stupid is moron, where we get our word for a mentally dull and sluggish person. In my judgment, only morons--more than 11,500 morons in this case--could sign a letter maintaining that the "timeless truths of the Bible" are compatible with the billions of unpredictable aberrations of evo-atheism. What do these apostate morons celebrate at their Sunday services, the lies about humanity's origins told by Moses, Jesus, and Paul? (p.57-58)
What kind of monster parents teach their children that they're descended from rodents and reptiles? (p. 66)
The chairman of the Texas Board of Education just endorsed a book that calls Christians who accept evolution "morons" and parents that teach their children evolution "monsters." Impeach this idiot. Immediately.
Politics
Comments
He's in TX....lynch him! =P
I believe the appropriate phrase is "get a rope"...
Let's hope this gets the publicity it needs.
Posted by: FastLane | March 20, 2009 9:22 AM
But... they... are descended from reptiles...
Posted by: Squiddhartha | March 20, 2009 9:23 AM
They do grow 'em with the really big stoopid in Texas, don't they.
That book is appalling as is the endorsement. His education sure left him a few large holes to fill and no shovel.
Posted by: MikeMa | March 20, 2009 9:28 AM
Ed - you should have your blogpost sent to the opinion pages of every major Texas newspaper. That may be the only way to save our country. Or perhaps to the Texans Citizens for Science (www.texscience dot org). I don't have any Texas connections. That's my excuse, and I'm sticking to that story.
Posted by: JimNorth | March 20, 2009 9:30 AM
Nope, no religion here! No siree, this only about academic freedom.
Posted by: MyPetSlug | March 20, 2009 9:34 AM
Ed, it's McLeroy, not McElroy.
Also, remember McLeroy supported the forced resignation of Chris Comer after she forwarded the email about Barbara Forest's lecture. Said she wasn't being "neutral". Under his own standard, McLeroy should now force himself to resign, don't you think? I mean, unless he's a huge hypocrite or something.
Posted by: Michael Suttkus, II | March 20, 2009 9:40 AM
But first fix the McLeroy/McElroy dichotomy. :)
Posted by: Dave S. | March 20, 2009 9:42 AM
Ed, it's Don McLeroy, not Don McElroy. You did that last time you wrote about him too. Okay, so did I. But now I've got it! As they say in Texas, fool me once, shame on... shame on you. Fool me... you can't get fooled again.
Posted by: Abby Normal | March 20, 2009 9:44 AM
This is my favorite part of the book:
I love how he feels the need to inform us that those were his brackets.
And what's the obsession with reptiles? We're also descended from lobe-finned fish, but I don't see this guy whining about "fish-based" education.
Besides, "reptile" is a paraphyletic group, so he's wrong anyways.
Posted by: Wes | March 20, 2009 9:44 AM
Dman my slow typing speed!
Posted by: Abby Normal | March 20, 2009 9:46 AM
Abby - You d'man! - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | March 20, 2009 9:48 AM
Dman my slow typing speed too...DMAN it all to HELL!! :)
Posted by: Dave S. | March 20, 2009 9:52 AM
All you reptile-based name correctors: Sure do wish old Don McLeroy had as many people watching out for him and telling him he'd made an error ;-)
Posted by: MikeMa | March 20, 2009 10:00 AM
Sure do wish old Don McLeroy had as many people watching out for him and telling him he'd made an error
Silly Mike; creationists are never wrong. God says so right there in the Bible.
Posted by: schism | March 20, 2009 10:10 AM
Is it just me, or do those quotes from the book read like incoherent creationist blog posts from any variety of science blogs?
Posted by: dogmeatib | March 20, 2009 10:12 AM
- What kind of monster parents teach their children that they're descended from rodents and reptiles?
Honest ones.
Signed, Proud Monster Parent of 2 Gecko-Spawn. (make a cool bumper sticker, eh?)
Posted by: T. Bruce McNeely | March 20, 2009 10:25 AM
dogmeatib - Yep, I concur wholeheartedly. Note the hyperbolic statements completely untrammeled by a single, solitary fact. Plenty of gall, spleen and various other rags of offal, but (predictably) no brains.
A classic creationist screed. - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | March 20, 2009 10:26 AM
So to say we are descended from animals somehow robs people of dignity. (Although there is nothing in the law of evolution[1] to preclude people from choosing to be moral.)
Yet according to these people, religion is uplifting. Even though it teaches that we are created from dirt, inherently sinful and deserve death.
Can someone explain this to me?
Note 1: Maybe it's time to stop calling it a theory so people cannot use the "it's just a theory" line.
Posted by: Blue Nine | March 20, 2009 10:40 AM
Cnogarts to Michael for getting it frist.
Posted by: Abby Normal | March 20, 2009 10:43 AM
Blue Nine: But it IS a theory. It's time to teach people what the word means in a scientific context.
My favorite part of unhinged creationist screeds like this one is the neologisms - "evoatheist" is pretty funny. Remember, we say we believe in common descent so that we can deny that we're being led by Satan.
Posted by: chancelikely | March 20, 2009 11:01 AM
Did you see the cover of the book? The Serpent is threatening precious, innocent, little Christian children. It even has "Our Children" and "Reptiles" highlighted, just to drive home how bizarre the ideas of the "evo-atheists" are.
I like this synopsis of the last chapter (from the publisher's site):
The publisher has other books on the subject of ancient Greek art being a cipher for the Bible (in fact, that seems to be their main focus), including The Parthenon Code, by Robert Bowie Johnson, Jr.:
It comes highly recommended by the Senior Advisor to the Southern Baptist Convention and the Executive Producer of "Coast to Coast AM", so you know it's a sane work of scholarship. Also available in a PowerPoint version.
Posted by: jpf | March 20, 2009 11:04 AM
Googling for "evo-atheism" produces over 500K finds.
What a mighty cult! Better sign up quick, before all the virgins are taken.
Blue Nine: Better to start calling Genesis the "dirt theory".
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | March 20, 2009 11:14 AM
Evoatheism is my new favourite word.
Posted by: Captain Mike | March 20, 2009 11:15 AM
"But Pontos, the great sea, was father of truthful Nereus who tells no lies, eldest of his sons. They call him the Old Gentleman because he is trustworthy, and gentle, and never forgetful of what is right, but the thoughts of his mind are mild and righteous." — Hesiod, Theogony 233
As apposed to the Christians god who was proud of his ability to lie. (2 Thessalonians 2: 11) -DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | March 20, 2009 11:19 AM
I have had my differences with Lenny Flank, but there is one thing that he was spot-on right about. You don't need to Expel these guys, you just need to hand them a microphone. They will invariably give the game away.
Posted by: carlsonjok | March 20, 2009 11:20 AM
One of the pro-science members of the board better jump on this quickly. I'd love to see McLeroy squirm in front of a large audience while being forced to confront the words in the book. There is no way he can deny that he's trying to force his religious views after this.
Posted by: Iason Ouabache | March 20, 2009 11:31 AM
Oooooooo ... a new term "evoatheism". Sounds so evil. Just perfect for eviluthonists.
Posted by: Ron | March 20, 2009 12:16 PM
Texas is now officially lost to the union.
We need to start thinking about a fence.
Posted by: Thomas Lee Elifritz | March 20, 2009 12:22 PM
I just sent a link to the Dallas Morning News about this story. Lets see if they print it online or in print.
Posted by: William | March 20, 2009 12:25 PM
It's been linked to before, but it's particularly apt for this thread.
Posted by: Taz | March 20, 2009 12:29 PM
Wes,
Completely off topic, but reptiles are only paraphyletic if you exclude birds. Since birds are just lizards with fancy scales, reptiles is monophyletic (of course the ornithologists, especially of the bird-watching ilk, are still screaming bloody murder)
Posted by: Scott Reese | March 20, 2009 12:37 PM
I had to giggle at that, for it is teh funneh.
How can they get so much FAIL into so few words?
Posted by: twincats | March 20, 2009 1:12 PM
Scott,
More aptly crocodilians with fancy scales, but your point is otherwise good.
Posted by: c-serpent | March 20, 2009 1:30 PM
c-serpent, if you are going to get specific about it, they are just another saurischian dinosaur (and then we don't have to worry about the fancy scales bit as that was pretty common in that lineage).
Posted by: Scott Reese | March 20, 2009 1:39 PM
He actually embarrasses the NAS with a long list of their quotes where they make the obvious claim that evolutionists believe in evolution.
Hmm sounds really "intriguing". I bet there's some really "intriguing" quotes in there. Color me "intrigued".
Posted by: tweetbirdie386sx | March 20, 2009 2:18 PM
As an experiment, I asked my fifth grader if humans were descended from reptiles, and he said "Yes!" Good boy. Then I asked if humans were descended from birds, and he also said "Yes," so I took a moment to point out that synapsids branched off before birds evolved, so we're related but not descended.
Then I asked him if humans were descended from Sasquatch, and he amusedly said that if Sasquatch existed, we'd probably be related, but he thought that people were confused by gorillas and invented Sasquatch.
Posted by: Squiddhartha | March 20, 2009 2:20 PM
So I think it's safe to assume that Mr. McLeroy had his ears plugged during the board hearings. He probably thought everybody had an "agenda". An eeevillll ageeenddaaaaaa wooooooooooooooo...
Posted by: tweetbirdie386sx | March 20, 2009 2:23 PM
Squiddhartha,
Your 5th grader is pretty darn bright. He should run for McLeroy's seat. Bound to do a better job by a long way.
Posted by: MikeMa | March 20, 2009 2:31 PM
How many years ago was the Scopes trial again?
Posted by: Gingerbaker | March 20, 2009 2:48 PM
DOH! Squiddhartha, now you are going to make me put my herpetologist hat on and hijack this thread even further. It probably depends on where you put Mesosaurs in your vertebrate phylogeny. At present (at least in the phylogeny I have), Mesosaurs are sauropsids but not reptiles. That means that the reptile clade evolved after the split between sauropsids and synapsids. If that's true, then we didn't actually descend from reptiles. I think at best we could say we shared a common ancestor, but descent is a bit hard (of course I expect your fifth grade child to know all of this by tomorrow /snark)
Of course, one could make the case that the paraphyletic group of pelycosaurs were really just big lizards anyway, but that is another discussion :).
Posted by: Scott Reese | March 20, 2009 2:51 PM
How many years ago was the Scopes trial again?
Last Tuesday...
One of the pro-science members of the board better jump on this quickly.
At this point one has to wonder if there are any pro-science board members...
Posted by: dogmeatib | March 20, 2009 2:55 PM
TFN has a follow up post on McLeroy's endorsement of this book. It turns out the book's author is even more idiotically insane than we thought:
This is shaping up to be just as bad as when Warren Chisum circulated a memo supporting fixedearth.com in the Texas State legislature. McLeroy has just endorsed a world-class loony.
Posted by: Wes | March 20, 2009 3:32 PM
I consider myself to be an ovo-atheist. Poached, soft-boiled, or scrambled.
Posted by: wrpd | March 20, 2009 3:37 PM
I just left this comment over at TFN. Might as well have all of Robert Bowie Johnson's crazy concentrated into a single thread:
Robert Bowie Johnson is also the creator of some rather strange board games:
Sounds like a real classy guy...
Posted by: Wes | March 20, 2009 3:52 PM
jpf, Wes:
So Bob Johnson is just as bad at history, archeology, mythology, political science, and current events as he is at science, then? One wonders if there's any part of the school curriculum that "Dr." Johnson has even the slightest bit of comprehension about.
Posted by: Sean Micheal | March 20, 2009 4:02 PM
Scott, I'm still not hip to the latest in cladistics, so I was going by my old memory of synapsids as "mammal-like reptiles" -- I see now that the terms have been redefined while I wasn't looking. But I think I'll wait for another time to bring that up with my boy... :)
Posted by: Squiddhartha | March 20, 2009 4:10 PM
You can read the full release here. We wonder: does Chairman McLeroy also think President Obama is under the influence of Satanic teachings? Inquiring minds want to know.
Would it really be such a big surprise if McLeroy was as kooky as that? I don't think it would be such a big surprise to anybody.
Posted by: 386sx | March 20, 2009 4:32 PM
Protocols of the Elders of Darwin?
Posted by: Benjamin Geiger | March 20, 2009 4:52 PM
I wrote the top-rated review of the book on Amazon. I was very disappointed that the author did not discuss how scientists exploit the immorality of the bonobo to benefit the contraceptive industry.
Posted by: Gen. JC Christian, patriot | March 20, 2009 4:55 PM
It looks like Mr. Johnson is even whackier then Alan Keyes, which is pretty hard to do.
Posted by: SLC | March 20, 2009 6:29 PM
Well, you certainly are a hoot, "Gen. JC Christian."
Very nice.
Posted by: Gretchen | March 20, 2009 7:03 PM
Hey blue nine--we may be related. My daddy's cousins spelled out the "nine."
Truly, secondary school systems everywhere (except Texas and Tennessee) urge the TSB and Mr. Mcleroy to keep up the good work. It's opening up lots of good spots at quality universities for my students.
ice
Posted by: ice9 | March 20, 2009 9:18 PM
Picture this headline:
McLeroy Supports Book Calling Texas Clergy "Morons"
Or this Newscast teaser:
"Does the head of the Texas State Board of Education think that Texas parents are 'monsters'? Details at 11. "
Posted by: John the Skeptic | March 20, 2009 10:47 PM
I think you're all missing the point: Johnson has a crippling phobia of reptiles. This book is a cry for help from a broken man.
Posted by: MPW | March 20, 2009 11:00 PM
MPW,
Johnson is not 'broke' enough if he can afford to self-publish this crap.
Posted by: MikeMa | March 21, 2009 8:00 AM
"What's the matter with Texas?" the sequel to "What's the Matter with Kansas?" needs to be written.
What with Chuck Norris claiming that he's going to be the president of the "Republic(an) of Texas" when they fight that big war with Mexico and this insanity.
And I thought Indiana was bad. Guess i should be thankful for Sugar Creme Pie...
Posted by: John of Indiana | March 21, 2009 10:41 AM
I feel a strange urge to buy this book...
Posted by: Bribes | March 21, 2009 11:31 AM
Here is post on the evolution blog of the Houston Chronicle about the same topic, with some additional followup links.
Posted by: frankino | March 21, 2009 12:10 PM
Creationism is not science. It is based on no scientific evidence. It does not follow any empirical testing. It is not a logical conclusion from empirical observation. It DOES NOT BELONG IN A SCIENCE CLASS.
Posted by: Creationismisnotscience | March 21, 2009 12:43 PM
Damn you, James Knox Polk, you couldn't leave well enough alone!
Posted by: Prup (aka Jim Benton) | March 21, 2009 12:52 PM
MPW: I think you're all missing the point: Johnson has a crippling phobia of reptiles. This book is a cry for help from a broken man.
You guys do remember that reptiles have a special meaning in Christian mythology, right? (Hint: a certain snake in a certain garden)
It's not random that he's using reptiles to discredit evolution in the eyes of devout Christians.
Posted by: pepeloco | March 21, 2009 3:57 PM
Pepeloco - I'm... sort of embarrassed I didn't immediately realize that myself. Especially what with the picture on the cover and all.
Posted by: MPW | March 21, 2009 7:45 PM
Maybe there IS some problem with flouridating public drinking water.
Personally, I think that Rachel Raye is the Anti-Christ(ette)--she's an EVOO-atheist!
Posted by: democommie | March 22, 2009 9:25 AM
Can we just go ahead and let Texas secede from the nation?
I'm willing to forego Tex-Mex food if we can stop counting these idiots as fellow Americans.
(At the very least -- their citizens won't be able to *EVER* run for US President, since they would not have been born US citizens...)
Posted by: Aaron | March 25, 2009 6:11 PM
I concur with MPW. Mike Royko used the same reasoning back in the 1980s to describe the rabid anti-environmentalism of Ronald Reagan's Secretary of the Interior, James Watt:
"I think Watt is afraid of snakes and bugs."
The same is probably true of McLeroy. I recommend deprogramming him via controlled exposures to videos of Steve Irwin and Jeff Corwin.
Posted by: Julie Stahlhut | March 25, 2009 10:18 PM
Perhaps one of the Lawyers here can help me, but isn't forcing someone to watch even a few seconds of Steve Irwin "Cruel AND unusual punishment? - DJ
PS Perhaps they could work up to it. You know a little Rusty, a touch of Heath, some Kylie, a little John Farnham, then whip out the heavy torture - "Home & Away", "Neighbours", "Prisoner", Rolf Harris and finally Stevo.
Posted by: DingoJack | March 26, 2009 12:43 AM
"The National Academy of Sciences' Sinister Scheme to Teach Our Children They're Descended from Reptiles"
Jesus! It was bad enough when those Darwinists said we were descended from apes, but reptiles? That's even worse! Next they'll be saying we'll are descended from single celled organisms!
Posted by: Neuroskeptic | March 26, 2009 4:35 AM
This book is an appalling violation of the First Amendment, the courts should see right through Mcleroy if he tries to force this bilge into the classroom. And, as a theistic evolutionist, I find the text terribly insulting.
For the record, I asked my little brother if we are descended from reptiles. He said "No. We come from fish."
Bless his little heart, I gave him the credit anyway.
Posted by: Feste | March 26, 2009 4:34 PM
That would be a really interesting book to read. I don't know if it is going to be of much benefit from people who are wanting to learn about another perspective on things. I think that there needs to be a few things addresses so that there isn't much confrontation.
Posted by: medical marijuana school | March 22, 2011 4:10 PM