High School Field Trip to Creation Museum

| 43 Comments

I just received an e-mail from the Center for Inquiry, which begins thus:

Matthew LaClair … has alerted us that his former history teacher, David Paszkiewicz, is at it again. You may recall Mr. Paskiewicz–he’s the one who was recorded by LaClair telling students that dinosaurs were on Noah’s Ark and if “you reject the Lord’s salvation, you belong in hell” (New York Times, 12/18/06). This time, he is acting as the advisor of a Christian club at Kearny High School (located 10 miles outside of Manhattan in New Jersey), called the Alpha and Omega Club, which has scheduled [a field trip to the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, June 5-7].

LaClair, who is no longer a student at the school, learned about the trip from the student newspaper. He evidently alerted the school district’s lawyer and also contacted Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. He convinced the school board to postpone the trip till school was out today, June 5, so that the trip would take place entirely out of hours (I infer, therefore, that the trip is no longer an official school field trip). In addition, he got the school board to remove the listing of the Christian club under history and social science.

The Center for Inquiry notes that there are still some troubling problems. School officials initially approved the trip, which suggests to CFI that they were “asleep at the wheel.” CFI adds that

a public school teacher with strong religious convictions and a record of proselytizing is being allowed to serve as the advisor of a religious club and use his position to have a public school approve a patently religious-based fieldtrip.

Religious clubs are permitted in schools, but the adviser is supposed to be “neutral.” CFI questions the teacher’s neutrality since he

has overtly and repeatedly discussed and promoted religious beliefs with his students in the past, and his proposed fieldtrip to the Creation Museum demonstrates that he continues to do so today, dangerously blurring the line between his own personal faith commitments and his obligations as a teacher in a government-funded public school system.

43 Comments

Matt,

So did I, and so did NCSE. I posted the entire text here:

http://pandasthumb.org/archives/200[…]mment-188437

New Jersey is noted for having very good secondary schools, but I find this more than a bit distressing since Kearny is a suburb of Newark, which is a mere 30 minute subway ride (via PATH - the subway system run by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey) from lower Manhattan.

This merely shows how we must all remain vigilant.

I remember seeing a map of the United States that Ken Miller showed during his private NYC talk two weeks ago, and I was amazed that within the last few years, in 44 out of the 50 states, there has been anti-evolution activity at least at the local, if not state, level.

Appreciatively yours,

John

Someone from the school might reasonably ask why they couldn’t just visit a local museum. It would be much less expensive, and surely just as educational. But the answer to this question might be informative as well.

Are you saying the center of evolution belief is in Newark? Or Manhattan?

Didn’t Kent Hovind debate at Rutgers a while ago?

Don’t think for a second that creationist crap is for the hicks in Kansas.

So did I, and so did NCSE. I posted the entire text here:

And so did lots of people; i didn’t mean to imply I was the only recipient. But I have too high a regard for the copyright system to have reproduced the entire text. Indeed, if my students catch me lifting passages verbatim, they will probably give me hell.

If you noticed, I did attribute it to the Center for Inquiry, but I thought it was sufficiently newsworthy to post in full.

It’s been alive and well amongst some alumni of that bastion for “conservative” and Fundamentalist Protestant Christian thought, Brown University, the alma mater of such notables as Chuck Colson, Bobby Jindal and David Klinghoffer:

paul fcd said:

Are you saying the center of evolution belief is in Newark? Or Manhattan?

Didn’t Kent Hovind debate at Rutgers a while ago?

Don’t think for a second that creationist crap is for the hicks in Kansas.

John Kwok -

It’s been alive and well amongst some alumni of that bastion for “conservative” and Fundamentalist Protestant Christian thought, Brown University

I believe that the “Brown phenomenon” is probably an example of the tendency of some creationists to “pretend to believe” science for a few years in order to get a respectable degree, in the hopes that this will make their preconceived biases more respectable. (It must take a high tolerance for cognitive dissonance to accomplish this. Then again, “high tolerance for cognitive dissonance” and “hypocrisy” are not easy to differentiate between.)

No doubt they choose liberal Brown to send the message “I studied evilution at the most liberalist and fanciest east coast school ever, and I still believe in a literal Noah’s ark, so Genesis must be literally true!”

No, not quite, though I still remember a Bronx native who was a member of the Brown chapter of the Campus Crusade for Christ who told me she was going to return there to teach science from a “Christian” perspective (in that case, either YEC or OEC, ID hadn’t emerged yet) in a public school. Hers is the only example I can think of, though recently, an old acquaintance of mine who is active in the Brown Club of New York sent me an e-mail in which he doubted not only evolution’s validity as a scientific theory, but claimed that, having studied molecular pharmacology, he could see the reality of design:

harold said:

John Kwok -

It’s been alive and well amongst some alumni of that bastion for “conservative” and Fundamentalist Protestant Christian thought, Brown University

I believe that the “Brown phenomenon” is probably an example of the tendency of some creationists to “pretend to believe” science for a few years in order to get a respectable degree, in the hopes that this will make their preconceived biases more respectable. (It must take a high tolerance for cognitive dissonance to accomplish this. Then again, “high tolerance for cognitive dissonance” and “hypocrisy” are not easy to differentiate between.)

No doubt they choose liberal Brown to send the message “I studied evilution at the most liberalist and fanciest east coast school ever, and I still believe in a literal Noah’s ark, so Genesis must be literally true!”

I am sure that all of those I mentioned chose to study at Brown because of the excellent college education it provides (In the interest of full disclosure, both Ken Miller and I are fellow alumni.). However, I am incapable of explaining how someone who had majored in Biology, Bobby Jindal, still refuses to recognize modern evolutionary theory as the central unifying theory of biology. Had his professors emphasized this fact - to the best of my knowledge, not only did he never take Ken’s introductory biology course, he never once was exposed to evolutionary biology as a Brown undergraduate - perhaps his attitudes towards both Intelligent Design and evolution would be quite different (In a related note, in the latest issue of Science, Genie Scott says that all undergraduate biology courses should emphasize evolution, instead of mentioning it - if at all - as an after thought.

Regards,

John

School officials initially approved the trip, which suggests to CFI that they were “asleep at the wheel.”

That’s a very generous interpretation of the school officials’ actions. Facts like Paszkiewicz’s history at the school, and the administration’s handling of the Matt LaClair incident, and now this, indicate that the officials, or a significant faction among them, are deliberately helping this teacher promote creationism and other Christian-right ideologies inside the school. I think their eyes are wide open and they know just where they’re steering the vehicle.

“a public school teacher with strong religious convictions and a record of proselytizing is being allowed to serve as the advisor of a religious club and use his position to have a public school approve a patently religious-based fieldtrip.”

Oh my, that is horrifying! To think that he might even read the Bible to them on the way is too much to even fathom …

Quick, change the constitution so that’s illegal and lock him up!!!

Do you have an argument to make, Whatisyourproblem, or are you just here to be a smug asshole again?

paul fcd said:

Don’t think for a second that creationist crap is for the hicks in Kansas.

That the Discovery Institute is housed in Seattle should destroy that notion right quick.

@whoisyourcreator: I’m all for having a bible course that teaches young people to “critically analyze” the scriptures. Shall we begin with the contradictions, inconsistencies, and refuted-by-scientific-fact assertions in Genesis?

who is your creator said:

“a public school teacher with strong religious convictions and a record of proselytizing is being allowed to serve as the advisor of a religious club and use his position to have a public school approve a patently religious-based fieldtrip.”

Oh my, that is horrifying! To think that he might even read the Bible to them on the way is too much to even fathom …

Quick, change the constitution so that’s illegal and lock him up!!!

No change in the Constitution is necessary. From the 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals:

“While at the high school, whether he is in the classroom or outside of it during contract time, Peloza is not just any ordinary citizen. He is a teacher. He is one of those especially respected persons chosen to teach in the high school’s classroom. He is clothed with the mantle of one who imparts knowledge and wisdom. His expressions of opinion are all the more believable because he is a teacher. The likelihood of high school students equating his views with those of the school is substantial. To permit him to discuss his religious beliefs with students during school time on school grounds would violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Such speech would not have a secular purpose, would have the primary effect of advancing religion, and would entangle the school with religion. In sum, it would flunk all three parts of the test articulated in Lemon V. Kurtzman, …”.

John Kwok -

I offer you an explanation of Bobby Jindal. Of course, it’s just my hypothesis.

He finds it convenient to claim to be a creationist. He may have internalized this to some degree, or he may just outright lie in public; it’s irrelevant which.

He came to that decision before attending Brown.

He went to Brown with every intent of going through the motions, passing his biology courses, but then going back to claiming to be a creationist as soon as the saps at Brown had printed his diploma and handed it to him.

Why didn’t he just go to Liberty U? Because he wanted the greater respectability that a Brown degree provides, even if he did have to lie a little to get it.

One potential benefit is that, when in closed quarters with creationist supporters, he can pander to them by saying “those eastern evilutionist scientificalists don’t know what they’re talking about. I should know, I studied right there at Brown University, and I’m a creationist”.

Do you have an alternate hypothesis that can explain his behavior?

I’m not a psychoanalyst so I won’t venture here:

harold said:

John Kwok -

I offer you an explanation of Bobby Jindal. Of course, it’s just my hypothesis.

He finds it convenient to claim to be a creationist. He may have internalized this to some degree, or he may just outright lie in public; it’s irrelevant which.

He came to that decision before attending Brown.

He went to Brown with every intent of going through the motions, passing his biology courses, but then going back to claiming to be a creationist as soon as the saps at Brown had printed his diploma and handed it to him.

Why didn’t he just go to Liberty U? Because he wanted the greater respectability that a Brown degree provides, even if he did have to lie a little to get it.

One potential benefit is that, when in closed quarters with creationist supporters, he can pander to them by saying “those eastern evilutionist scientificalists don’t know what they’re talking about. I should know, I studied right there at Brown University, and I’m a creationist”.

Do you have an alternate hypothesis that can explain his behavior?

But let’s assume for the sake of argument that you’re right by examining my case.

I arrived at Brown as a staunch conservative and befriended members of the campus chapter of the Campus Crusade for Christ. I often attended their meetings and became their resident skeptic. I graduated from Brown, still a conservative, and still accepting evolution as valid science. Then why am I different from Jindal?

Regards,

John

John Kwok said:

I arrived at Brown as a staunch conservative and befriended members of the campus chapter of the Campus Crusade for Christ. I often attended their meetings and became their resident skeptic. I graduated from Brown, still a conservative, and still accepting evolution as valid science. Then why am I different from Jindal?

Because, unlike Mr Jindal, you feel that a) rabid, unthinking devotion to religious dogma is not a prerequisite for party loyalty, b) you’re aware of the stereotype of Conservative American politicians either being religious maniacs who consider good science a mortal sin, or are financed by religious maniacs who consider good science a mortal sin, and that c) relying solely on religious dogma is a recipe for disaster?

No, I think it’s because having had a “ringside seat” watching the Religious Right’s emergence on campus as a Brown University undergraduate, I learned to appreciate the wise counsel of Barry Goldwater who denounced the Religious Right’s prominence in Republican Party circles back in 1981. If nothing else, my political views have become more libertarian and less conservative, since my graduation from Brown:

Stanton said:

John Kwok said:

I arrived at Brown as a staunch conservative and befriended members of the campus chapter of the Campus Crusade for Christ. I often attended their meetings and became their resident skeptic. I graduated from Brown, still a conservative, and still accepting evolution as valid science. Then why am I different from Jindal?

Because, unlike Mr Jindal, you feel that a) rabid, unthinking devotion to religious dogma is not a prerequisite for party loyalty, b) you’re aware of the stereotype of Conservative American politicians either being religious maniacs who consider good science a mortal sin, or are financed by religious maniacs who consider good science a mortal sin, and that c) relying solely on religious dogma is a recipe for disaster?

Flint said:

Someone from the school might reasonably ask why they couldn’t just visit a local museum. It would be much less expensive, and surely just as educational. But the answer to this question might be informative as well.

I wouldn’t agree that this particular teacher ought to be visiting a local museum either, unless it was known that he could keep his own religious views out of his commentary with public school students.

That could be challenged as an infringement on one’s First Amendment rights:

I wouldn’t agree that this particular teacher ought to be visiting a local museum either, unless it was known that he could keep his own religious views out of his commentary with public school students.

For example, each weekend, Jehovah’s Witnesses sends groups of its members to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, where its officially sanctioned “tour guides” lead tours in which they reinterpret all of Ancient Near East and Egyptian archaeology according to Old Testament scripture. The Metropolitan Museum of Art hasn’t challenged their right to do so (But I’ve gotten a good laugh or two at the expense of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.).

I have read that at the Denver Museum of Science, local Fundamentalist Protestant Christian churches have conducted tours of its paleontological halls, reinterpreting everything on display in the context of Young Earth Creationism. Needless to say, this activity is regarded as a great nuisance by the museum’s curators, but they are legally powerless to act, unless, for example, the church groups damage the fossils on display.

I completely agree with your comment below. I failed to make my intent clear, which was, in the context of the teacher being an adviser for a school based organization I believe that the teacher would have to maintain neutrality while part of an activity for that group. The students themselves would be free to express their own opinions (as they might given the nature of their club).

This would be admittedly less easy to oversee, but school administrators do have the responsibility to oversee all school activities to ensure that they conform to appropriate standards.

John Kwok said:

That could be challenged as an infringement on one’s First Amendment rights:

I wouldn’t agree that this particular teacher ought to be visiting a local museum either, unless it was known that he could keep his own religious views out of his commentary with public school students.

For example, each weekend, Jehovah’s Witnesses sends groups of its members to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, where its officially sanctioned “tour guides” lead tours in which they reinterpret all of Ancient Near East and Egyptian archaeology according to Old Testament scripture. The Metropolitan Museum of Art hasn’t challenged their right to do so (But I’ve gotten a good laugh or two at the expense of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.).

I have read that at the Denver Museum of Science, local Fundamentalist Protestant Christian churches have conducted tours of its paleontological halls, reinterpreting everything on display in the context of Young Earth Creationism. Needless to say, this activity is regarded as a great nuisance by the museum’s curators, but they are legally powerless to act, unless, for example, the church groups damage the fossils on display.

To be entirely clear in my attempt at a correction above, I should have the word “PUBLIC” in front of the word school where ever that appears.

In addition to the possibility of independent tour guides as given by John Kwok above, written Creationist handbooks are available for a wide variety of public venues and parks. So if you are planning a trip to the Grand Canyon say, the group next to you could very easily be explaining it from the perspective of Noah’s flood.

Gaythia said: In addition to the possibility of independent tour guides as given by John Kwok above, written Creationist handbooks are available for a wide variety of public venues and parks. So if you are planning a trip to the Grand Canyon say, the group next to you could very easily be explaining it from the perspective of Noah’s flood.

But… but… you can’t!

Dozens of separate strata, all quite clearly different and definite, all lying in orderly progression, each containing different fossils, from different biospheres, of different lifeforms, sorted not by size or density, but by organisation and degree of difference from current lifeforms, the simplest and most different on the bottom, and sometimes separted by clearly volcanic lava flows.

How can you explain that by one almighty flood?

Dave Luckett said:

Gaythia said: In addition to the possibility of independent tour guides as given by John Kwok above, written Creationist handbooks are available for a wide variety of public venues and parks. So if you are planning a trip to the Grand Canyon say, the group next to you could very easily be explaining it from the perspective of Noah’s flood.

But… but… you can’t!

Dozens of separate strata, all quite clearly different and definite, all lying in orderly progression, each containing different fossils, from different biospheres, of different lifeforms, sorted not by size or density, but by organisation and degree of difference from current lifeforms, the simplest and most different on the bottom, and sometimes separted by clearly volcanic lava flows.

How can you explain that by one almighty flood?

You are absolutely correct, I cannot explain it. Just wasn’t covered as part of my undergraduate geology degree. Sorry about that.

Dave Luckett said:

Gaythia said: In addition to the possibility of independent tour guides as given by John Kwok above, written Creationist handbooks are available for a wide variety of public venues and parks. So if you are planning a trip to the Grand Canyon say, the group next to you could very easily be explaining it from the perspective of Noah’s flood.

But… but… you can’t!

Dozens of separate strata, all quite clearly different and definite, all lying in orderly progression, each containing different fossils, from different biospheres, of different lifeforms, sorted not by size or density, but by organisation and degree of difference from current lifeforms, the simplest and most different on the bottom, and sometimes separted by clearly volcanic lava flows.

How can you explain that by one almighty flood?

As a much more serious answer to David Luckett, we need to explore ways to convey scientific knowledge, and especially an understanding and appreciation of the methods of scientific inquiry to the next generation. An understanding of geology and biology begins to be developed at a much younger age than that at which the concepts of evolution are formally introduced.

Obviously, from the point of view of groups such as the Center for Inquiry in the case above above, it is the blatant examples of involving religion and Creationist teaching in public schools that can most readily receive attention. One good thing about these high profile cases is that they do offer teachable moments which can serve as examples to others. Hopefully this includes those in a position of leadership in public education.

From the point of view of students it is probably a series of much smaller incidents that have the most impact. Or non incidents. There is remarkably little science teaching in many lower grade public school classrooms these days. Many children have little access to nature.

David Luckett gives a great description of stratigraphy here. Maybe he is a Grand Canyon Handbook writer?

This comment has been moved to The Bathroom Wall.

This comment has been moved to The Bathroom Wall.

This comment has been moved to The Bathroom Wall.

Gaythia said:

Maybe (Dave Luckett) is a Grand Canyon Handbook writer?

No, not at all. But I have seen it, once. It was awesome and wonderful. The only other place I’ve ever been like it was the Bungle Bungles, in the West Australian Kimberley. Same unmistakeable orderly stratification, same distinct and discrete banding of dozens of layers, and same scale - not vertical in the Australian case, but horizontal, because those ranges cover an enormous area with dozens of canyons, or gorges as we call them here. There is simply no way that it could have been made by a single flood. Anyone who could look at it and say it was, is dreaming.

Dave Luckett said:

Gaythia said:

Maybe (Dave Luckett) is a Grand Canyon Handbook writer?

No, not at all. But I have seen it, once. It was awesome and wonderful. The only other place I’ve ever been like it was the Bungle Bungles, in the West Australian Kimberley. Same unmistakeable orderly stratification, same distinct and discrete banding of dozens of layers, and same scale - not vertical in the Australian case, but horizontal, because those ranges cover an enormous area with dozens of canyons, or gorges as we call them here. There is simply no way that it could have been made by a single flood. Anyone who could look at it and say it was, is dreaming.

I agree, without having had the opportunity to travel to Australia to see the Bungle Bungles, except just now, via Google. I never heard of this location before, but it also appears to be awesome.

I tend to think that any child that has actually seen a place like the Grand Canyon or the Bungle Bungles, regardless of the “information” that is presented to them at that time, is likely to be better able to evaluate the science that is presented to them in the future.

Well Dave, on a slightly humorous note, for the last few years, NCSE has sponsored each summer a white water rafting trip down the Colorado River. When they arrive at the Grand Canyon, Genie Scott reads from her YEC propaganda, explaining how the canyon was created via “Flood Geology”:

Dave Luckett said:

Gaythia said: In addition to the possibility of independent tour guides as given by John Kwok above, written Creationist handbooks are available for a wide variety of public venues and parks. So if you are planning a trip to the Grand Canyon say, the group next to you could very easily be explaining it from the perspective of Noah’s flood.

But… but… you can’t!

Dozens of separate strata, all quite clearly different and definite, all lying in orderly progression, each containing different fossils, from different biospheres, of different lifeforms, sorted not by size or density, but by organisation and degree of difference from current lifeforms, the simplest and most different on the bottom, and sometimes separted by clearly volcanic lava flows.

How can you explain that by one almighty flood?

I’m missing something here. This creationist teacher, formerly called to the carpet, is advising a student club (presumably meets after school), and is chaperoning them to that embarrassment to the nation on the border of Ohio. The trip is apparently taking place during summer vacation, not on school time. Presumably these are christian fundamentalist students. What’s the constitutional problem? How is this different from the activities of a Flat Earth Society Club, or FSM club for that matter? Yes, these students, and that teacher, are on the cutting edge of the nation’s failure to “get” science, but don’t they have the right to do this so long as its not on school time?

You may have to read a little between the lines, but if the school board had to approve the trip, then it was originally an official school trip, and the original departure time was evidently during school hours. LaClair, remember, got the departure time postponed till after school. In the end, the students must have traveled to that embarrassment on their own time and without school board approval, but I do not think that was the original plan.

The policy of the local school district with which I am most familiar has, I believe, language to the effect that student initiated and led religious organizations must not be directed by outside persons, and must be supervised by a school staff person, but only in a non-participatory capacity.

So I believe that your description of a chaperone could work.

Based on my reading of the item as posted above, it sounds as if of the CFI is (or was) concerned that this teacher was not remaining neutral.

Of course, if the trip is completely independent of the school, then the policy would not apply.

I have emailed all of the leaders of the school board, principals and local newspapers telling them how illegal and wrong it is to allow this admitted liar to prosletize at a public school.

He broke the law, AGAIN.

who is your creator said:

“a public school teacher with strong religious convictions and a record of proselytizing is being allowed to serve as the advisor of a religious club and use his position to have a public school approve a patently religious-based fieldtrip.”

Oh my, that is horrifying! To think that he might even read the Bible to them on the way is too much to even fathom …

Quick, change the constitution so that’s illegal and lock him up!!!

This comment has been moved to The Bathroom Wall.

Daxx-Terry Green said:

I have emailed all of the leaders of the school board, principals and local newspapers telling them how illegal and wrong it is to allow this admitted liar to prosletize at a public school.

What, didn’t you get the memo? It’s Not Really Lying If You’re Lying For Jesus™

As long as you claim to be doing god’s work, you can get away with anything. That quaint old rule against bearing false witness doesn’t apply if you’re doing it to spread the WORD. You can even get caught abusing children and still have the cult defend you (see John Freshwater and the catholic church)!

Creationism is dishonesty elevated to divine status. They worship their own lies and willful ignorance.

Mike said: The trip is apparently taking place during summer vacation, not on school time…What’s the constitutional problem?

I wonder if Morse v. Frederick (the infamous “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” sign case) is relevant. The school claimed the ability to punish a student for speech that occurred off school property at a public, non-sponsored event. And the Supreme Court agreed.

Now, I’m not defending that ruling. But since we have to live with it, we might as well put it to good use. If a school can reach out and touch a student like that, why not a teacher on a technically-unsponsored-but-clearly-affiliated-with-the-school field trip?

The school claimed the ability to punish a student for speech that occurred off school property at a public, non-sponsored event.

I don’t want to defend the decision either, but you can find a synopsis here. The court rejected the argument that the student, Frederick, was not in school:

Frederick’s argument that this is not a school speech case is rejected. The event in question occurred during normal school hours and was sanctioned by Morse as an approved social event at which the district’s student-conduct rules expressly applied. Teachers and administrators were among the students and were charged with supervising them. Frederick stood among other students across the street from the school and directed his banner toward the school, making it plainly visible to most students. Under these circumstances, Frederick cannot claim he was not at school.

I doubt that the decision applies to the field trip, since they must have taken pains to make sure it was no longer an official school activity.

So now we’re refusing to allow differing opinions into the Public Sewer System? Are you so afraid that children will see the logic of Creation and realize the fallacy of evolution that you refuse to allow them to study different viewpoints? That’s brainwashing, not education.

MC1171611 wanked:

So now we’re refusing to allow differing opinions into the Public Sewer System? Are you so afraid that children will see the logic of Creation and realize the fallacy of evolution that you refuse to allow them to study different viewpoints? That’s brainwashing, not education.

So tell us what the “logic of Creation” is. What logic is there in teaching religion in the form of Creationism instead of attempting to teach actual science in a science classroom? What logic is there in using a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis instead of studying life in order to understand life? What logic is there in believing that all terrestrial life today are descended from whatever Noah shoved into his Ark, yet, not bothering to explain how they left the Ark on Mt Ararat to go to all of their separate homes around the world?

MC1171611 said:

That’s brainwashing, not education.

Said the pot to the kettle.

You. can. not. promote. religion. in. a. public. school. Period. Not yours, not mine, not the Ayatollah’s, none. Suck it up, princess.

How much do you actually know about the facts of evolution, MC? My guess is you’ve only heard the lies from ICR and DI.

Using religion to explain biology is like hiring a poet to predict the weather.

Get a clue, already.

Cue the “atheism is religion” canard in 3, 2, 1…

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Matt Young published on June 5, 2009 8:53 PM.

Endless Forms at Cambridge was the previous entry in this blog.

Bogus is as bogus does is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter