"No. We need to leave the science standards as they are for now."

"I'd have to see the specific standard to answer intelligently."

"No, I would not support either of these proposals."

"I would not support revising the state science standard prior to the next regularly scheduled revision review."

"No, the standards for science should be under the same scheduled protocol as other educational standards for teaching."

"NO!"

"NO!"

"I do not consider revision of the standards to be a priority. However, if new data becomes available which indicates the need for a review of existing standards, I would remain open to a review.

I have stated publicly and openly that the theory of evolution should be scrutinized along with any other theory that makes its way to the domain of scientific review. I can see no logic in attempting to isolate and protect this theory against the broad range of theories in science, economics, sociology, etc. On this subject, our standards appear to be out of balance. Theories are theories and facts are facts. While some would claim that the theory of evolution is ironclad and without fault, I respectfully disagree, and so do many individuals who belong to the organizations listed above [csa: see question #1]. I know because I've visited with them on this very subject. Therefore, it should remain open to criticism, adjustment due to new data and evidence, and overall improvement."

"NO!!!"