Skip navigation.
The Critic's Resource on AntiEvolution

Line Numbered Transcripts Index - P900-933


1 A Yes.

2 Q All right. We'll get to that in just a minute.

3 Tell us now about the timing and the mechanism. After

4 receiving this first group of books, what did you do?

5 A Well, it was obvious to me because of the subject

6 matter that it dealt with, and too, Because then the

7 legislature passed a bill which was the same thing.

8 Q Are you talking about Act 590?

9 A Act 590.

10 Q All right.

11 A Because of the fact that it dealt, and it dealt in

12 geology, it dealt in chemistry, physics, biology, I felt

13 like we really needed experts in those particular fields.

14 And in the meantime, too, Mr. Fisher and I were, like,

15 writing an introduction to our unit, trying to come up

16 with an introduction. We were trying to come up with an

17 outline. Then when the bill passed, you know, the outline

18 fell in our lap. So we got an outline.

19 I contacted biology professors for their help, could

20 they, you know, tell me some sources to go to to expedite

21 the matter because Mr. Jones was prodding me, you know,

22 `Let's get this done', and kept saying, `Well, we are

23 going to present it to the April board meeting.' You

24 know, just keeping me going. So I was trying to find ways

25 to expedite writing the unit using legitimate sources.


A (Continuing)

1 We took the bill and made an outline, a major outline

2 using the bill because then we were going to have to

3 comply with the law anyway, and there was no sense in, you

4 know, wasting our time. We put it in terms of complying

5 with the law.

6 We took the six points of the bill and divided them in

7 biological science or physical science because that's the

8 way science usually falls, one or the other.

9 There were several drafts made of the unit. We would

10 write something like, for example, if it said "no ancestor

11 to man or ape". Then we'd go back and say, `No, we are

12 going to take out all negative references whatsoever.' If

13 "no" is a negative reference, we are going to have to

14 reword this where it says "separability of man and ape".

15 You know, we tried to make it as positive an outlook as

16 possible.

17 In the meantime, I was looking at, reading the books and

18 things like that, looking for information.

19 Q Let me hand you first two documents. One which has

20 been previously marked for purposes of identification as

21 Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 24, and another Plaintiffs'

22 Exhibit Number 25 for identification and ask you if you

23 can identify each of those documents?

24 A They are drafts, two drafts that were typed of my



1 A (Continuing) outline or my unit on creationism.

2 Q Can you tell me approximately when in the stage of

3 development of the unit those happened and why you had

4 these two drafts and why didn't even settle on these two?

5 A I can't give you an exact day, but you mean like

6 this was the first one and this was the second one?

7 Q Yes. Which one was the first one? 24 or 25?

8 A Let me look just a second. 24 was the first typed

9 draft, and 25 was the second one. One of the reasons that

10 we did away with 25 has already been stated by Mr. Wood.

11 25 is a more, it's where I took an article and read it and

12 made an outline of the article itself or what I thought

13 appeared in the article.

14 And I did away with that for the fact that that was

15 simply my opinion. And I didn't want a teacher to not

16 read the article, to read my opinion. You know, you and

17 could read the same two articles and come up with two

18 entirely different conclusions. And that was one of the

19 reasons.

20 I did outline it in detail, too, because I went through

21 a lot of material, and I needed something on paper that

22 refreshed my memory and told me what I read because if you

23 read about Australopithecus and Ramapithecus, those words

24 weren't really in my working vocabulary until then, and I

25 needed something concrete so that I could refer to it


1 A (Continuing) easily. And this was one of the

2 reasons I made the draft, too.

3 You know, we thought about using it, out then discarded

4 it because we wanted the teacher to read the article.

5 MR. KAPLAN: Your Honor, we would offer Number 24

6 and Number 25.

7 THE COURT: They will be received.

8 MR. WILLIAMS: Your Honor, for the record, I'd like

9 to state that Defendants want to object to this entire

10 line of inquiry on the ground that it really is premature

11 and speculative.

12 We came here prepared to try this case on the basis of

13 whether this Act is constitutional on its face. And the

14 Plaintiffs appear to be trying to show that's it's going

15 to be unconstitutional as applied, trying to use this,

16 perhaps, as an example.

17 And on those grounds, we are not prepared to try that

18 particular issue. We are here to try it on its face since

19 it is not yet implemented. We would claim some prejudice

20 and surprise on that ground.

21 MR. KAPLAN: Your Honor, there was clearly full

22 interrogation in this matter in her deposition. It

23 doesn't go to application either. It just is another peg

24 in our theory with regard to how it is absolutely

25 impossible to devise something that is science to conform


1 MR. KAPLAN: (Continuing) with Act 590.

2 THE COURT: That's overruled.

3 MR. KAPLAN: (Continuing)

4 Q All right. I want to elaborate a little bit further

5 about 24 and 25. As I understand from your testimony,

6 what you did was to take Act 590 and instead of having six

7 points, you joined two and now had five points.

8 Now, the evidences that are evident or that appear in

9 the outlines 24 and 25, how did you get those individual

10 points, and how did they make their way into the outline?

11 An article, for example, about Australopithecus?

12 A Mr. Fisher and I sat down with the material that Mr.

13 Fisher had. Going through the material, the creationists

14 would cite an evidence to support a particular point. And

15 in every case, the points that were in the bill were in

16 all the creationist material, sometimes verbatim. So it

17 was easy to put them in their right category.

18 And we would list, you know— We would come up with,

19 you know, ten or twelve.

20 Q Now, can you tell me if in your meetings with Mr.

21 Fisher you established any criteria to which you, at

22 least, attempted to adhere with regard to how the outline

23 and the material, the supplemental unit on creationism,

24 was going to be devised?

25 A Yes. I would tell him that, `Let's, if we were


1 A (Continuing) going to support a point, let's find

2 evidence from a legitimate science article. Let's try to

3 steer away from anything that was from a creation

4 publisher, and I mean that with a little c , any creation

5 publisher or any affiliate of. Let's try to, you know,

6 get in our community, our scientific community.

7 Q After you got all of these materials down, all of

8 these evidences that he gave you, what did you do to

9 attempt to find some scientific community evidence for

10 every single one of those points? Tell me the process by

11 which you attempted to do this?

12 A I solicited help from, or even some people said

13 they'd help me. For example, I would ask in the area of

14 biology to meet with biology professors from the

15 University of Arkansas at Little Rock and the University

16 of Central Arkansas because they were close. No other

17 reason. You know, it was not feasible to, we didn't have

18 the money and they certainly wouldn't come down here, so

19 we used local people.

20 And sat down with biology teachers in biology and sat

21 down with physics teachers, physics professors in physics,

22 and geology and chemistry.

23 Mr. Jones and I would sit down with them. We would take

24 the unit and they would look at the points, and we would

25 ask them— We would tell them our purpose, and we would


1 A (Continuing) ask them, `Now, look, you are not

2 trying to refute the evidence. You are looking at it

3 through a creationist's point of view. Can you— Is

4 there any way an inference can be made on this point and

5 hold water.'

6 Sometimes they were very helpful. You know, they really

7 tried. Some of the professors, you know, all but asked us

8 to leave. They just saw no point in doing this type of

9 thing.

10 MR. CHILDS: Your Honor, I'd like to object if this

11 evidence is being offered for the truth as contained

12 therein. We would object on the basis it was hearsay-

13 As I understand, it's being offered solely to show the

14 process that this lady went through. If I'm correct in

15 that, I have no objection.

16 THE COURT: That's the way I understand it is

17 offered.

18 MR. KAPLAN: That's right.

19 A (Continuing) Say, for example, if there was one of

20 the topics that had several evidences cited, we would go

21 through each one of them, or they would for me and say,

22 `Maybe you can support this; maybe you can't', or

23 `There's no sense wasting your time', or `Yeah, you know,

24 you might could look through this.'

25 And we would weed them down.


1 Q For all the evidences that you had when you went

2 through your first compilation and you listed all of these

3 evidences after sitting down with Fisher, were you ever

4 able to find in the case of one single one any documenta-

5 tion from the scientific community to establish one of

6 those evidences?

7 A No.

8 Q But you came up with a unit?

9 A Yes.

10 Q Well, let's go through that unit and see what

11 happens?

12 THE COURT: Why don't we take about a fifteen minute

13 recess, Mr. Kaplan.

14 (Thereupon, Court was in

15 recess from 3:20 p.m. to

16 3:40 p.m.)

17 JUDGE BYRD: Your Honor, it is stipulated that C. A.

18 Hunt's deposition can be introduced without him signing it

19 and that his exhibits can be attached to it.

20 He handed them to me and Steve and a verity of them has

21 to come through that chain. The same goes true for

22 Reverend W. A. Blount.

23 Now, the witnesses ask that they be furnished a copy of

24 their deposition so they could look at it in case somebody

25 asks them a question about it.


1 MR. CEARLEY: We would be happy to furnish copies,

2 your Honor. And my understanding is that we now have an

3 agreement whereby we can attach the documents as exhibits

4 to the deposition without authenticating them by having

5 the witnesses come in again.


7 MR. CEARLEY: I intend to introduce all of them, two

8 of them with signatures and two without signatures.

9 THE COURT: Fine.

10 JUDGE BYRD: And my witnesses are no longer under

11 subpoena?

12 THE COURT: No, sir.

13 MR. CLARK: That's our agreement, your Honor. Of

14 course, we object to the relevancy of this, but you know

15 our objections.



18 Q Ms. Wilson, you were about to begin the identifi-

19 cation of the unit which you finally developed. Let me

20 hand you now what I have previously marked as Plaintiffs'

21 Exhibit Number 18 for identification and ask you if you

22 can identify that?

23 A It is the unit that I presented to our school board

24 in September, an outline of our unit on creation.

25 Q Is that the only thing that you presented to the


1 Q (Continuing) school board?

2 A Yes.

3 Q Is that in a final teachable form?

4 A By no means.

5 Q Let me hand you now a document which I have marked

6 previously for purposes of identification as Plaintiffs,

7 Exhibit Number 19 and ask if you can identify this?

8 A This is Appendix I which correlates my outline under

9 "Ancestry of Man and Ape".

10 Q Can you tell the Court, please, the kinds of

11 documents which are found in Appendix I?

12 A Two articles. One that deals with Australopithecus

13 and the other one deals with Ramapithecus.

14 Q And now can you identify for me serially Plaintiffs'

15 Exhibits 20 through 23?

16 A Upon scanning these, they are Appendices II through

17 V which correlate to my outline that was in my unit that I

18 presented to the school board.

19 Q Were any of the Appendices I through V actually

20 presented to the school board?

21 A No.

22 Q Now, the outline as it appeared that is 18—

23 MR. KAPLAN: Your Honor, we would offer 18 through

24 24. I'm sorry. Through 23.

25 THE COURT: Those will be received under the same


1 THE COURT: (Continuing) objection.

2 MR. KAPLAN: (Continuing)

3 Q Let's take a look at 18 The outline itself is now

4 considerably briefer and in word form as opposed to

5 sentence form, is that correct, or as opposed to paragraph

6 form?

7 A Yes.

8 Q And can you tell me why you chose to follow that

9 procedure as opposed to the full paragraph development

10 that you had previously?

11 A Because the full paragraph one was my perception of

12 the articles and not— Just my opinion.

13 Q Now, the material that was in the paragraphs in the

14 earlier forms, numbers 24 and 25, did they all find

15 themselves into numbers 19 through 23 in some way or at

16 least most of it?

17 A The materials that were in the first draft, did they

18 find themselves into—

19 Q Yes.

20 A Not all of them.

21 Q Let's go over these appendices and see, at least,

22 what you did and how you yourself felt about them.

23 Handing you now Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 19.

24 Tell me the source from which you obtained 19, the two



1 Q (Continuing) articles that you've already told us

2 are in 19?

3 A One of them was from a creation publication. The

4 other one was from "Science Digest", April 1981.

5 Q Now, you told us already that you had said to Mr.

6 Fisher that you did not want to use any material from one

7 of the creationists publications.

8 Can you tell me why you violated that self-imposed rule?

9 A Because I just simply could not find any other

10 material.

11 Q Do you believe in your best judgment that either of

12 those two articles supports any of the positions with

13 regard to scientific creationism?

14 A No, I don't.

15 Q Why did you include it?

16 A I had to come up with something.

17 Q The material from "Science Digest", can you explain

18 to us what that is and whether it supports any kind of

19 separate ancestry for man and animal?

20 A The article is entitled "Ancestors", and the only

21 reason that I came up with this article was, I was at a

22 particular school — This is not in answer to your

23 question — and the librarian happened to say, `Aren't you

24 working on creationism.' Here's an— They found an

25 article with monkeys on it, So they gave it to me.


1 A (Continuing)

2 Okay. But I did read the article. And it is establish-

3 ing that there was a separate ancestry for, I believe,

4 that it was not in the line for Australopithecus.

5 Q Tell us again what the assertion of the article is,

6 rather than my characterizing it?

7 A That it was in a separate line of ancestry. It

8 didn't fall in between man— It wasn't in, like, monkey,

9 the Australopithecus, and then man itself. Separate.

10 Q With regard to Number 20, can you take a look at

11 that?

12 A This is Appendix II that evidences, that imply

13 changes only within fixed limits. And it contains

14 articles on— It contains both articles from creation

15 publishers. And there is an article from the "Scientific

16 Monthly."

17 Q Does the article from "Scientific Monthly" establish

18 in any way or conclude or lead one to conclude in any way

19 that there was change within some fixed limits?

20 A No. The article in "Scientific Monthly" was simply

21 that the Tuatara, which is a small reptile, has been

22 around for a long time.

23 Q Anything in Appendix II which establishes any

24 proposition in a scientific manner for separate, for

25 change within fixed limits?


1 A Not directly at all.

2 Q With regard to Number 21, Appendix III, can you tell

3 me what is there?

4 A It is the appendix for the young earth and solar

5 system. There is an article from "Readers Digest" about

6 atomic clocks.

7 Q Is "Readers Digest" a science source?

8 A No.

9 Q Is there anything in that article or any of the

10 other articles in Appendix III which establish the

11 proposition for, that any of the creationists seek to

12 establish?

13 A The point to establish that there was a young earth,

14 and that's why the article was written? No.

15 Q These articles, are the points of the articles for

16 an entirely purpose?

17 A Yes.

18 MR. WILLIAMS: Your Honor, I want to object on the

19 grounds of the best evidence rule. I think the articles

20 themselves are the best evidence of the content. And to

21 try to prove their content or the conclusions by the

22 testimony of this witness is improper.

23 THE COURT: That's overruled.

24 MR. KAPLAN: (Continuing)

25 Q In regard to Number 22, Appendix IV, can you tell us


1 Q (Continuing) what that shows and what you did find?

2 A This seeked to support the global, as we had it

3 stated first of all, global hydraulic cataclysm, which is

4 the flood.

5 Q Were you able to find anything to support a

6 scientific theory or any scientific basis in the worldwide

7 flood?

8 A Everything that is in here is from a creation

9 publication, and no.

10 Q Were you able to ascertain in any of your readings

11 what the worldwide flood was?

12 A No. The only reference to a worldwide flood that I

13 know of is in the book of Genesis.

14 Q Appendix V, Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 23?

15 A This supports or is for the evidences on thermal

16 dynamics. And it is excerpts from our textbook that we

17 use in our physics classes in Pulaski County Special

18 School.

19 Q Is there anything in Exhibit Number 23 which speaks

20 to support and does support in a scientific way the

21 creationist viewpoint with regard to the second law of

22 thermodynamics

23 A Not as I understand thermodynamics and as the

24 scientific community understands thermodynamics, no.

25 Q Is this unit, even with the appendices attached, in


1 Q (Continuing) teachable form?

2 A No.

3 Q Is it anything which you could or would teach?

4 A No.

5 Q Why did you come up with it, Ms. Wilson?

6 A Because our board told us to come up with a unit.

7 We told them we could not come up with a science unit.

8 Q What is this unit?

9 A The intent of the unit was a view of creationism, to

10 present creationism from a creationist point of view,

11 present evidences to support creationism from the eyes of

12 a creationist, how they would interpret.

13 Q And if it is not science, as you understand it as a

14 science educator, what is it?

15 A It's just a view.

16 Q Did you ever meet with Mr. Bliss or Doctor Bliss?

17 A Yes.

18 Q Can you tell me how that came about?

19 A He was in the Little Rock area or in Arkansas,

20 specifically the Little Rock area, to conduct some

21 workshops — one in Conway and one in Fort Smith — on the

22 two model approach.

23 And because of his information that he knew that we were

24 writing a unit or we were going to possibly implement a

25 unit on creationism, he came to us to talk about being a


1 A (Continuing) source.

2 Q Did you attend a workshop with him?

3 A He came and spoke with me personally and with Mr.

4 Jones and with Doctor Measel. And then he told us that he

5 was having a workshop in Conway at Central Baptist

6 College, and I did attend his workshop.

7 Q Did you do anything with regard to adopting his two

8 model approach?

9 A No, because as Mr. Glasgow has already stated, in

10 looking at his method of presenting the information and

11 one of the scales that he used in his packet on attitudes,

12 we teach the cognitive process; not attitudes. And he

13 referred to a creator in his two model approach. And I

14 threw his material in the trash.

15 Q Did you also get material from a man named

16 Sunderland?

17 A Yes.

18 Q Before I go into the Sunderland material, had you

19 ever had any experience with a confrontive or two model

20 approach before?

21 A One of the books that I looked at that Mr. Fisher

22 had, in particular, advocated the two concepts, the two

23 model approach to teaching.

24 Q Have you ever experienced it before in connection

25 with any instruction that took place in the science


1 Q (Continuing) classroom?

2 A No.

3 Q How about the material from Sunderland?

4 A Mr. Sunderland was an independent who had developed

5 a slide presentation on the subject. And we were trying

6 to get away from creationist publishers, getting material

7 as independent as possible.

8 And we looked at his material. In fact, purchased his

9 slide presentation.

10 Q In connection with your deposition, did you supply

11 to Mr. Childs the transcript of the film strip that goes

12 along with the film strip for the Sunderland material?

13 A The slide presentation of it, yes.

14 Q Let me hand that to you and ask you to look at

15 paragraph number seven and read paragraph number seven?

16 THE COURT: What is this now?

17 MR. KAPLAN: This is another piece of creation

18 science material purchased by the Pulaski County Special

19 School District.

20 THE WITNESS: This is the transcript to the slide

21 presentation.

22 THE COURT: Okay.

23 MR. KAPLAN: (Continuing)

24 Q Would you read number seven?

25 A "The creation model, on the other hand, holds that


1 A (Continuing) the universe could not have generated

2 itself. It is incapable of doing so on the basis of the

3 observable scientific law now operating. Therefore,

4 creation postulates that the universe and all living

5 things must have been created by a supernatural power

6 external to the universe. Various organisms, including

7 man, are functionally complete when created."

8 Q And the very next paragraph?

9 A "The creation model states that the Creator created

10 certain basic kinds of life which had in their genes the

11 capability to vary and survive in a changing environment.

12 The original created kinds cannot be precisely defined

13 just as there is no exact definition of the species."

14 Q Read number sixteen.

15 A "Keep in mind that the two models are totally of life.

16 Opposite explanations for the origin of life. Evolution

17 says there has been one continuous development from a

18 common ancestor. Creation says there is a sudden creation

19 of complete functional organisms. Both cannot be correct,

20 and the fossil records should completely agree with one

21 and totally contradict the other. An unbiased assessment

22 of the fossils should clearly show which model is

23 correct. What should it show in each case?"

24 Q That's all right.

25 What I'm really concerned about here is, in your entire


1 Q (Continuing) educational experience, have you ever

2 come across any kind of teaching technique that asks

3 students to make this kind of decision as to something

4 being right or something being wrong?

5 A No, not in science.

6 Q How long would it take to— Strike that.

7 THE COURT: May I ask a question? Were they

8 proposing that these materials be used in public schools?

9 Was there any disclaimer associated with them?

10 THE WITNESS: From Mr. Sunderland?

11 THE COURT: Or Doctor Bliss?

12 THE WITNESS: No, Doctor Bliss, I mean he wanted to

13 conduct an in-service for our teachers. That was his

14 purpose in meeting with me.

15 He, in fact, told me how much it would be to have him

16 come to our school district. And, you know, he was

17 looking at the calendar as to what days he could— You

18 know, we have teachers report on a certain day, and when

19 he could meet.

20 And Sunderland, there was no disclaimer at all. You

21 know, it was anybody and everybody could purchase it.

22 THE COURT: Who is Sunderland associated with?

23 MR. KAPLAN: He, apparently, is a single individual

24 in Apalachin, New York.



1 MR. KAPLAN: (Continuing)

2 Q Were you able to find any materials at all in your

3 investigation and preparation for the unit that you

4 developed that supported in a scientific manner any

5 proposition advanced by the creation science position?

6 A No.

7 Q Were you able to find any materials that were devoid

8 of religious references or religious background

9 A No.

10 Q in your view, were you able in the science, in the

11 unit, rather, that you did develop, to divorce from that

12 unit references to religion?

13 A No.

14 MR. KAPLAN: That's all.




17 Ms. Wilson, I don't have but just a few questions.

18 Q You do believe the State has the right to prescribe

19 curriculum for the public schools?

20 A Do I believe the State has a right?

21 Q To prescribe curriculum for public schools.

22 A To tell us what to teach, is that what you mean?

23 Q Yes, ma'am.

24 A No.

25 Q Do you think the State can prescribe curriculum to


1 Q (Continuing) the public schools?

2 MR. KAPLAN: Objection, your Honor. It calls for a

3 legal conclusion from this witness.

4 MR. CLARK: Your Honor, she stated— I'm asking her

5 to respond to a similar question that she answered in her

6 deposition.

7 THE COURT: Okay.

8 A I think I said in my deposition that we'll find out

9 when the ruling is made on this case.

10 Q Did you not say, "Yes. Now we're talking about raw

11 political power"?

12 A Well,—

13 Q Do you believe that the recent origin of man and

14 earth may or may not be inherently religious?

15 A Repeat the question, please.

16 Q Do you believe that the recent origin of man or

17 earth may or may not be inherently religious?

18 Let's say that it may not be inherently religious, how

19 about that?

20 A I believe it may or may not be.

21 Q Now, do you believe it may not be?

22 A Yes.

23 Q Do you consider yourself to be a scientist?

24 A A science educator.

25 Q Would you define that for me? What is a science


1 Q (Continuing) educator?

2 A A person who disseminates or facilitates scientific

3 information from the scientific community.

4 Q Can a science educator evaluate science?

5 A In terms of its educational purpose, yes.

6 Q In compiling the unit that your compiled, did you

7 discard any materials because you could not understand

8 them?

9 A No. I had to have some help sometimes in under-

10 standing them, yes. But the sole reason to discard them

11 was that I couldn't understand them, no.

12 Q Do you remember in your deposition a response to a

13 question about Exhibit Number 5—

14 A Pleochroic Haloes?

15 Q Yes.

16 A Yes.

17 Q Did you discard that because you couldn't understand

18 it?

19 A I'd never heard of it. I think I stated that in my

20 deposition it was given to me as an evidence. And I

21 believe that one of the scientists testified he didn't

22 call them, I don't think he used the term "pleochroic

23 haloes", but he was talking about polonium and the haloes

24 that they radiated on their breakdown.

25 In my evidence they called it "pleochroic haloes." I am


1 A (Continuing) a chemistry teacher or was a chemistry

2 teacher. And in my training I had never heard of it. I

3 asked other chemistry teachers what was a pleochroic

4 halo. I asked Mr. Fisher what was a pleochroic halo. He

5 Had supplied me with the evidence.

6 I asked college chemistry teachers what was a pleochroic

7 halo. Am I to expect a home economics teacher to under-

8 stand this concept?

9 I had to go back, and Mr. Fisher did, I asked him to

10 find the article that he used this reference from. And he

11 brought it to me and I read it. And I discarded it on the

12 basis that if I had to go through all that trouble to

13 figure it out, think what trouble it would create in a

14 classroom, especially in an eighth grade classroom where

15 we are dealing with thirteen year olds that barely under-

16 stand the concept of what an atom is.

17 Q I appreciate your explanation, but the question

18 remains the same. Did you throw it out because you didn't

19 understand it?

20 A I understand what it is, yes. No, I didn't throw it

21 out because I did not understand it.

22 Q Then you do understand what pleochroic haloes are?

23 A Yes.

24 Q So you did not discard the material because you did

25 not understand it?


1 A Right

2 Q Do you recall in your deposition when you were asked

3 about nuclides of uranium, "We threw that one out, I

4 think." "Why did you throw it out?" "Well, one reason—

5 A Could you tell me what page your reading from,

6 please?

7 Q Yes. I'm reading from page 49, beginning at line

8 20. Actually beginning with the question, line 17. "In

9 Exhibit 5 to Fisher's deposition, under Roman numeral I,

10 he talks about—" It reads on to say, "nuclides of

11 uranium."

12 "We threw that out, I think." Question, "Why did you

13 throw it out?" Answer, "One reason— May I see what you

14 are talking about?" Question, "Sure. Right there."

15 Answer, "What did you say?" Question, "First

16 paragraph-" Answer, "It was a piece of literature that

17 was— It talked about pleochroic haloes. We couldn't

18 find anybody that knew what pleochroic haloes were. That's

19 one reason we threw it out. I thought that was a pretty

20 good reason."

21 Now, did you throw it out because you didn't know what

22 it was?

23 A I think you are taking that out of context. As I

24 explained, I couldn't find anybody—

25 Q Ms. Wilson, you either threw it out because you


1 Q (Continuing) didn't know what it was or you did.

2 Yes or no. Did you throw it out because you didn't know

3 what it was?

4 A I threw it out.

5 Q Did you throw it out because you did not know what a

6 pleochroic halo is?

7 A I do now and did understand what a pleochroic halo

8 was. I'll answer your question, yes, I threw it out. I

9 think I explained why.

10 Q if in your deposition you said you threw it out

11 because you didn't know what it was, that's incorrect?

12 A Yes. In the deposition I went through the part that

13 we couldn't find anybody that understood it.

14 Q Have you, in your curriculum development in this

15 area or any other area, ever thrown something out because

16 you couldn't figure out what it was or someone else

17 couldn't tell you?

18 A No.

19 Q You are positive of that?

20 A Not to my knowledge. That threw out specific pieces

21 of material because we did not understand them—is that

22 your question?

23 Q That's what I asked?

24 A No, not to my knowledge.

25 Q In terms of curriculum development for science,


1 Q (Continuing) that's your responsibility, is that

2 not correct?

3 A Yes.

4 Q In terms of curriculum development for science, do

5 you always throw out ideas that you don't understand?

6 MR. KAPLAN: Objection. She never testified to

7 that, your Honor.

8 MR. CLARK: I'm asking her if she has in the past,

9 your Honor, because she did in this instance, or at least

10 she indicates she threw it out, she first said, because

11 she didn't know what it was.

12 THE COURT: Why don't you rephrase that question,

13 Mr. Clark.

14 MR. CLARK: I'll just withdraw it, Judge.

15 MR. CLARK: (Continuing)

16 Q What kind of search did you actually— How

17 exhaustive was your search for scientific evidences for a

18 creation explanation, Ms. Wilson?

19 A It was not completely exhausted. As I stated in

20 the—

21 Q Is it a continuing search?

22 A Am I still looking?

23 Q Yes.

24 A I was told to table my work by my school board. In

25 other words, `Don't spend anymore time on it.' I have


1 A (Continuing) other things to do. I've already

2 spent a vast amount of time, and I was told not to until a

3 ruling was made by the Court.

4 Q You were on the state textbook committee to select

5 the science text, is that correct, in '79., I believe you

6 testified to?

7 A Yes. For grades 9 through 12.

8 Q Does that include biology texts?

9 A Yes.

10 Q So you selected the group of texts that were on that

11 list or helped select?

12 A I helped, yes.

13 Q Do you have some familiarity with each of those

14 texts?

15 A Yes.

16 Q Are you aware that four of those texts have some

17 reference to the creation explanation of first origin?

18 A Yes.

19 Q Did you contact any of those textbook publishers

20 and/or authors about scientific evidences that would

21 support creation explanation of origin?

22 A In developing my unit?

23 Q Yes.

24 A No. I believe they did not present them in terms of

25 a science explanation.


1 MR. CLARK: I don't think I have any other

2 questions, Judge.

3 MR. KAPLAN: No redirect.

4 THE COURT: You can stand down.

5 MR. CHILDS: I would like to say, your Honor, I

6 appreciate counsel for plaintiffs agreeing to let us put

7 this cross examination over for just a little while.

8 Thereupon,



10 having been previously sworn or affirmed, being called for

11 cross examination, was examined and testified as follows:




14 Q Mr. Bullington, you discussed in your direct

15 testimony an organization described with an acronym of

16 CARE, C-A-R-E.

17 What does that stand for?

18 A Coalition Advocating Responsible Education.

19 Q Was Act 590 one of the activities that took place

20 that concerned your coalition?

21 A Yes.

22 Q And was the purpose of this CARE organization the

23 promulgation of the statement on academic responsibility

24 that was— Let me start over,



1 Q (Continuing)

2 Was one of the things that you all set out to do was

3 prepare a statement of academic responsibility to be

4 adopted by the Pulaski County Special School District?

5 A Yes. That was one of our primary purposes.

6 Q And in that statement on academic responsibility, is

7 there any indication that both sides of issues should be

8 heard in the classroom?

9 A I would like to see a copy of it. I mean, I was

10 involved in writing it, but it's—

11 MR. CHILDS: I will have to ask plaintiffs' counsel

12 for a copy.

13 THE WITNESS: And your question again, please?

14 MR. CHILDS: (Continuing)

15 Q Is there anything in that statement on academic

16 responsibility which was adopted by the Pulaski County

17 Special District which indicated that both sides of issues

18 should be presented in the classroom?

19 A I suppose you could give that interpretation of

20 sorts to number seven.

21 Q Now, then, in that statement on academic

22 responsibility, does the board delegate to the administra-

23 tion and teachers the duty to implement all policies

24 adopted by the board?

25 A The board establishes policies, and the administrative

staff and teachers implement policies.


1 Q Would it be safe to describe that delegation of

2 authority only being to the implementation of policies

3 approved by the board? And if you want me to rephrase the

4 question, I will try.

5 A If I understand it correctly, you are asking me if

6 we are to, if we only implement policies that the board

7 has directed us to implement.

8 Q Yes.

9 A And that would be true.

10 Q You heard Marianne Wilson testify that she had a

11 supervisor named Gene Jones, did you not?

12 A Yes.

13 Q Is Gene Jones a member of your coalition?

14 A Yes, he is.

15 Q And is Mr. Bob Cearley, who is one of the counsel

16 for plaintiffs, also a member of that organization?

17 A He is a member; not an active member.

18 MR. CHILDS: I have no further questions, your Honor.

19 THE COURT: Any redirect?

20 MR. KAPLAN: No, your Honor.

21 THE COURT: You may step down.

22 Mr. Cearley, how many more witnesses do you have?

23 MR. CEARLEY: Doctor Mayer is on the stand, and he

24 is the plaintiffs final witness.

25 THE COURT: Okay. How long will he take?


1 MR. CEARLEY: I expect his direct may be an hour to

2 an hour and a half.

3 THE COURT: Okay.

4 Thereupon,



6 called on behalf of the Plaintiffs herein, after having

7 been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined and

8 testified as follows:




11 Q Will you please state your full name for the record?

12 A William Vernon Mayer.

13 Q Briefly tell the Court what your educational

14 background is?

15 A I have a Ph.D. in biology from Stanford University

16 in California. I have taught at Stanford, the University

17 of Southern California, Wayne State University and

18 University of Colorado.

19 At the University of Southern California, I became head

20 of the biology department, acting head. I was head of the

21 biology department at Wayne State University. I was

22 associate dean of the college of liberal arts. I am

23 currently, as I say, professor of biology at the

24 University of Colorado.

25 Q Do you also have training in the area of biology


1 Q (Continuing) education or education in general?

2 A Yes, sir. At the time I was obtaining my doctorate,

3 I went for a fifth year at Stanford University, took all

4 the required courses for a certificate in teaching

5 science. This included all the standard educational

6 courses such as history of education, philosophy of

7 education, educational sociology, educational psychology,

8 statistics, methodology and so forth.

9 Q You have prepared at my request a curriculum vitae,

10 have you not?

11 A Yes, sir.

12 Q And does that accurately reflect your education,

13 training, experience and publications

14 A Yes, sir.

15 MR. CEARLEY: Your Honor, that curriculum vitae has

16 previously been furnished to the defendants and is marked

17 as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 92 for identification. I move its

18 admission.

19 THE COURT: It will be received.

20 MR. CEARLEY: (Continuing)

21 Q Do you have any publications that are not included

22 in your most recent curriculum?

23 A Yes, sir. Last month I presented a paper at

24 Nashville, Tennessee, to the National Science Teachers

25 Association area meeting entitled "The Fallacious Nature


1 A (Continuing) of Creation Science."

2 Q Have you written other articles on that subject,

3 Doctor Mayer?

4 A Yes, sir. I've authored about a half dozen biology

5 textbooks and about three hundred odd papers and

6 publications both in the field of science and science

7 education.

8 Q What is your current occupation?

9 A I'm Director of the Biological Sciences Curriculum

10 Study, abbreviated BSCS, in Boulder, Colorado.

11 Q And in that regard, have you held several positions

12 or with BSCS, have you held several positions?

13 A Yes, sir. I started with the BSCS in 1960, where I

14 came aboard as a writer on the topic of evolution. I

15 became associate director of that organization and assumed

16 the executive directorship in 1967, which I have held to

17 this date.

18 Q Do you act as consultant to any educational groups

19 or institutions?

20 A Yes, sir. I have consulted with school boards in

21 Florida and North Dakota. I have been a consultant and am

22 a consultant on the advisory board of Encyclopaedia

23 Britannica films. I have consulted with various

24 industries and state, local and federal government

25 agencies.