Here is part of his [Dr. Kenneth R. Summy, from the University of Texas Biology Department] letters to the Texas Academy where he cc’s the letter to Perez:

“Forrest Mims did not misrepresent anything regarding the contents of the keynote address, and should be commended for openly expressing his concerns – many of us out here feel exactly the same way.”

You can add this to the list of evidence that supports Mims’ account, including Brenna McConnell’s webpage (she was at the speech too) that stated the same conclusion as Mims (she actually SUPPORTS the idea.) You can add the comments of Rebecca Calisi who was also at the speech who came away with the same conclusion. You can add the two student evaluations that say the same thing as well. The evidence was there all along, yet the attackers came out of the woodwork to try to destroy Mims. It’s sickening…but this is often the state of science in 2006- lots of politics and personal attacks.

If it had been only one, Brenna McConnell, with what she wrote in her blog, the review of Pianka would have been suspect. Considering the initial report from Forest Mimms, Brenna’s eyewitness account and her agreement with Pinaka’s conclusions, Rebecca Calisi, the student evaluations mentioned above and Dr. Summy’s statement (a prof. from Pianka’s own dept. at the U. of T.) — To me, the question that is begged is:

Why do 200 of Texas’s scientists support someone as far out there as Eric R. Pianka? — What is wrong with you?

My ax is that there are far too many college and university professors of the ilk of Pianka and Ward Churchill, far too many with Liberal philosophys that they insist on cramming down their students’ throats, far too many secular humanists that believe that freedom of speech should go only one way.

Wish my ax was a lot sharper!

And you expect us to go with the one?

What sort of axe do you have to grind, anyway?