STAT and TABT issue a joint statement against S&W, remove January amendments. Detailed critique of the amendments, worrying about appropriateness and new testing requirements which might arise. Adopt the TEKS as presented by writing committees.
Emphasizes that gaps are not weaknesses in a theory.
Hardy: "I am concerned" about how much time is spent on evolution. 3 days. But we talk about it all year long.
Dunbar: Do you omit weaknesses to make time for strengths?
Robert Crowther is replaced by Casey Luskin. "Greetings!," he begins, omitting "earthlings!" He whines about treatment of Disco. at previous meetings. Has documents claiming to refute Hillis and Wetherington at previous meetings. Normal creationist claptrap. Cites New Scientist article. Claims this has been one-sided. Demonizes us and nearly every scientist as the "evolution lobby."
Cargill: What happens when it isn't in the standards? Casey: People use it "as a hammer" to keep creationism out. Horrors.
Craig: Do you dislike the new "analyze and evaluate"? I like it, why don't "evolution lobby" like it being applied only to evolution?
He's citing weak language on evolution in six states to claim that S&W has precedent elsewhere.
Casey needs decaf. Also thinks he's an expert in pedagogy.
Leo is worried about textbooks. Will Casey plug Explore Evolution?