Terri Leo is the leader of the Texas Taliban faction on the State Board of Education; she even exercised her perogative as a Board Member to make a speech before the last public hearing of the Board in Austin to profess her commitment to creationist-inspired skepticism about Darwin's theory of evolution (and this before hearing any testimony!).
She is also, of course, a shameless dissembler, like her tutors at the Discovery [sic] Institute. She now writes to the Dallas Morning News (September 2) to protest the (accurate) coverage of her shenanigans. I’ve appended my usual commentary:
Leo writes: “No board member is advocating removal of evolutionary theory or the inclusion of religion, creationism or intelligent design.”
Leiter: No, of course not, since that’s clearly unconstitutional (they’ve all read Beckwith’s book—or at least had it explained to them, for those that may not read). The goal for now is to force the textbook publishers to give students the false impression that there is significant scientific controversy about evolution, and open the door to their perhaps learning (say, via an Internet search) about “intelligent design” creationism.
Leo writes: “Our curriculum in Texas is not ‘agenda driven.’ It is driven by the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, which not only requires the teaching of evolutionary theory, but also requires that students must ‘analyze, review and critique hypotheses and theories as to the strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence and information.’”
Leiter: Leo, like other members of the Texas Taliban, is agenda-driven, indeed brazenly so, and in past years they have been successful in driving the content of textbooks to conform to their agenda. This is old news, and Leo can’t even believe her own nonsense on this score. (It was so bad last year, that one of the Republicans, Dan Montgomery, to his credit, dissented from the Board’s vote, to protest the meddling by the right and the left in the content of social studies textbooks.) The crucial thing about the TEKS requirement is the requirement that we’re dealing with “scientific evidence and information,” not evidence and information cooked up by one biologist (Behe), one biology PhD (Wells), and a bunch of slick professors of church-state studies, law, political theory (etc.), none of whom have managed to pass off their critiques in any peer-reviewed science journals, or even to defend their views against scientific critics.
Leo: “The only out-of-state people who came to the meeting to politicize the process and push their agenda were the ‘Darwinian thought police’ from California. They brought in CNN and have been very successful in misinforming every Texas media outlet. Californians may not like our TEKS, but that is the law in Texas.”
Leiter: Nice display of mindless Texas parochialism, Terri (and probably not politically prudent, given the huge number of ex-Californians now in Texas). The “thought police” she’s referring to are the actual scientists affiliated with the National Center for Science Education in California, who view it, for some reason, as their mission to try to make sure science textbooks reflect the best, current expert knowledge about science, and not stuff cooked up by amateurs with religious and political axes to grind. I actually appeared on the CNN episode Ms. Leo alludes to (its coverage was excellent, which is why she’s so incensed--indeed, much better than average for the Corporate News Network). CNN, in fact, tried to get some members of the Texas Taliban to speak, but they all declined. What a shame.
Leo: “If we censor scientific weaknesses to evolution, textbooks would not conform to the TEKS and we limit the best of our educators by directing them to avoid controversy. Those who would thwart the clear will of the State Board of Education in this regard, particularly in light of recent
advances in science, can only be described as censors, no matter what their organizational name may say.”
Leiter: Goodness, the Texas Taliban really hate the Texas Freedom Network, to whom Ms. Leo alludes in her final sentence. As to the “scientific weaknesses to evolution,” they are apparently so grave that the Discovery [sic] Institute searched all of Texas and could find only one retired biologist, not even at a research university, who would sign their letter protesting the “censorship” of “scientific weaknesses” in the theory of evolution.
Leo: “If education is a vehicle to broaden horizons and enhance thinking, varying scientific viewpoints should be welcome as part of the school experience.”
Leiter: Indeed. Show us some science, and we’ll broaden horizons (perhaps even yours, since your school experience appears to have failed you rather badly).
Leo: “By presenting scientific controversy accurately, students will learn how to
evaluate competing interpretations in light of evidence a skill needed as citizens, whether careers are chosen in science or not.”
Leiter: Who could quarrel? It’s just there’s no scientific controversy about this topic. Rather, there’s controversy driven exclusively by Texas Talibaners like Leo, with the help from some lawyers, public relations experts, one biologist, and one biology Ph.D., all of whom have the transparent motivation of getting their religious views in to the science curriculum of public schools.
You can find contact information for Terri Leo here. Do let her know what you think.
Recent Comments