Fisher said, "We actually have more evidence for evolution occurring than we do for the law of gravity. ... Something doesn't become a theory if it's got weaknesses. There may be some questions that may yet to be answered, but nothing that's to the level of a weakness."Uh, right...
Meanwhile the opposition argues thus:
"I'd argue it doesn't make sense scientifically to take it out," Don McLeroy, R-Bryan, the state board chairman, said of removing the "strengths and weaknesses" language. "Evolution shouldn't have anything to worry about — if there's no weaknesses, there's no weaknesses.Clear? It's all about strength and weakness. Which is why "evolution" has "nothing that's to the level of a weakness" and therefore hasn't got "anything to worry about", which is why it's a "theory".
That all cringingly said, as I read the article in the Austin Statesman, it seems like the strength of the fundamentalists in the current constellation in Texas is a bit less than the ominous picture the Texas Freedom Network presented recently (for instance, in a platform at the Ethical Society of Austin a couple of months back). That at least is good news of a sort.
However, the nonsense you see spouted by the ally of science shows the extent to which the peculiar ideation of the fundamentalists frames the discussion in these parts.