Topeka dentist and Shawnee County Republican Party chair Robert Meissner wants to be a member of the Kansas State Board of Education.
District 4 - Shawnee, Wabaunsee [go Chargers!] and parts of Douglas and Osage counties - has been admirably represented by Bill Wagnon for the past 12 years. Dr. Wagnon, who has fought valiantly to keep Kansas science standards unsullied by anti-science sentiments, announced in 2005 that he would not seek re-election. Personally, I've found Dr. Wagnon to be a source of inspiration and encouragement during the past few years. He's not one to mince words and doesn't pussyfoot around the truth.
Meissner, on the other hand, is the epitome of coyness. Even the staid Topeka Capital-Journal reports that
[Meissner's] stance on the teaching of evolution is less clear. He said he takes an open-minded approach to decisions and carries no agenda on the topic.
Back in 2004, Meissner challenged Wagnon for the same seat on the state school board but lost, although he still garnered 48.5% of the votes. During that campaign, he made some statements which were waffle-y at best:
Meissner said he would not rule out including intelligent design in science classrooms.
"I believe evolution is a scientifically credible theory that needs to be taught in its entirety in our schools," he said. "But I also believe there has to be the openness, the willingness, to evaluate the inclusion of other scientifically credible theories."
Meissner said after the debate that he had not decided whether he thought intelligent design was a credible scientific theory.
"To be honest, I haven't studied it that closely," he said. "I'm open to giving it careful consideration, but I'm totally unbiased at this point."
"I believe evolution is a scientifically credible theory that needs to be taught in its entirety in our schools," he said. "But I also believe there has to be the openness, the willingness, to evaluate the inclusion of other scientifically credible theories."
Meissner said after the debate that he had not decided whether he thought intelligent design was a credible scientific theory.
"To be honest, I haven't studied it that closely," he said. "I'm open to giving it careful consideration, but I'm totally unbiased at this point."
Keep in mind that ID proponents have maintained all along that ID is scientifically credible. Surely Meissner would know that ID is not accepted as science by the folks who actually, you know, do science.
But, that was in 2004. The Kitzmiller v. Dover ruling was still in the offing. Perhaps he was truly "totally unbiased" at that time. So let's look ahead a few years.
June 7, 2008:
"The tough thing is determining which experts you're going to believe."
Why does Meissner have qualms about accepting the findings of 99.9% of the world's experts in this particular field? Let me guess . . . he saw and swallowed Expelled.
Meissner's dance around the issue is troubling to those who support REAL science for Kansas' kids. Unfortunately, his dance looks like the all-too-familiar creationist shuffle.
"I do feel like whatever we teach has to be scientifically credible," Meissner said. "The tough thing is determining which experts you're going to believe."
"The tough thing is determining which experts you're going to believe."
Why does Meissner have qualms about accepting the findings of 99.9% of the world's experts in this particular field? Let me guess . . . he saw and swallowed Expelled.
Meissner's dance around the issue is troubling to those who support REAL science for Kansas' kids. Unfortunately, his dance looks like the all-too-familiar creationist shuffle.
posted by Cheryl Shepherd-Adams
