Here are excerpts from today's coverage, available in its entirety at:
Topeka Capital Journal
Opponents of the hearings by a three-member panel of the Kansas State Board of Education say they are a "publicity stunt" -- more theater than substance. But critics say it is essential that the state board and students learn more about evidence that contradicts evolution -- viewpoints they say are often shunned by closed-minded colleagues.
"We would go a long way in this discussion by simply having the majority view say, 'We don't know' instead of saying, 'We do know and this is what it is: It's a naturalistic process,' " said William Harris, the first witness and a leading proponent of changing the standards.
Some of the changes Harris and others are proposing are consistent with intelligent design, but Harris said intelligent design is a "new and maturing science" and it would be inappropriate to mandate teaching it. Instead, he said, students should learn evidence against the theory of evolution, particularly when it comes to species evolving into new species.
"Secondly, we want to make the point that this controversy has profound implications for religion and philosophy," he said. "If this did not have implications for religion, this room would be far emptier today."
"The fact the other side isn't here, that speaks volumes to me because they cannot defend themselves," Nancy Hanahan, of Overland Park, said of those boycotting the proceedings.
But those who refused to participate in the hearings said their actions were justified. Harry McDonald, president of Kansas Citizens for Science, said state board members already have made up their minds and scientists didn't want to give the "appearance of a legitimate debate."
Thursday was the first of three days in which critics of evolution will make their case. During about eight hours of testimony, six witnesses brought by lawyer John Calvert, managing director of the Intelligent Design network, made the case for transforming a minority viewpoint into new curriculum standards for schoolchildren in Kansas.
The three conservative state board members serving as a jury for the hearings were a receptive and sometimes adoring audience for the witnesses.
"I'm an elementary teacher, and I am humbled by the intelligence before me, so bear with me," Connie Morris, of St. Francis, told Charles Thaxton, who has a doctorate in physical chemistry and has written books about the weaknesses he sees in the theory of evolution.
Thaxton said there is no evidence of a "primordial soup" from which life would have emerged.
"I can go out of here, and people will say to me, 'You've been saying there is evidence that refutes Darwin's theory of evolution,' " Morris said. "I've been hoping this hearing would help me have some good, hard evidence that I can show."
But critics of the witnesses described the testimony as misleading and sometimes uninformed.
Topeka lawyer Pedro Irigonegaray, who is representing those opposed to the hearings, asked pointed questions as he cross-examined witnesses.
"Would you suggest," Irigonegaray later asked Harris, "that any time that we do not have a natural explanation we ought to stop looking for it and invoke miracles?"
William S. Harris, a University of Missouri-Kansas City professor and proponent of intelligent design, presents his testimony.
"If we don't have a natural explanation we should keep looking for it," Harris responded, "but there has got to be a point -- just as it came with the alchemist of the Middle Ages -- where someone said, 'Enough is enough. We're not going to make gold out of lead.'
************
So apparently Troy was right.
Judging from Ms. Morris, apparently anyone can get on a school board.
™ Version 4.2