About the same time DI was involved.
They were asked after the December suit to testify but eventually said no to the request.
Notice it was a withdrawal of defense witnesses whose depositions had been long before been scheduled. The DI had been involved, and then pulled out.
Prove it.
In his deposition, Buckingham said he was contacted by the DI way back when the debate over the textbook was going on. If I have my timeline correctly, that was Summer. He says the DI even sent him some materials.
But then maybe you got me, maybe Buckingham was lying. After all, he lied under oath on the witness stand.
Where is the proof?
So your references represent proof, yet mine don't? If you want to contest what was in the article, feel free to contact Matt Duss, the person who discovered it.
Proof.
Notice it was a withdrawal of defense witnesses whose depositions had been long before been scheduled. The DI had been involved, and then pulled out.
Notice that the suit was not filed until December and that DI had already declined support for the Dover group in Nov. Are you really such a poor salesman?
In his deposition, Buckingham said he was contacted by the DI way back when the debate over the textbook was going on. If I have my timeline correctly, that was Summer. He says the DI even sent him some materials.
This is what you must prove..... Because that's about when the DI was in talks with the board over "teach the controversy."
Sending an unsolicited DVD is not "in talks about teaching the controversy." Prove the talks with the BOARD existed.
So your references represent proof, yet mine don't?
What references have you provided? You spout alot, but you don't show where you got the information. And my references show support for my position. The upshot is that Scopes was a conspiracy to bring about charges and Kitzmiller was not.