Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LEXINGTON DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. :0-CV-00-KSF DEPOSITION OF JAMES KRUPA, Ph.D. C. MARTIN GASKELL PLAINTIFF v. UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY DEFENDANT The deposition of JAMES KRUPA, Ph.D., was taken on behalf of the plaintiff before Ann Hutchison, Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for the Commonwealth of Kentucky at Large, at the law office of Baker, Kriz, Jenkins, Prewitt & Jones, PSC, 0 West Vine Street, Suite, Lexington, Kentucky, on Wednesday, March,, beginning at the hour of : p.m. The deposition was taken by notice and shall be used for any and all purposes allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including use at trial. ACTION COURT REPORTERS North Mill Street Lexington, Kentucky 00 () -00
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: APPEARANCES COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF: Francis J. Manion Geoffrey R. Surtees American Center for Law & Justice-Kentucky New Hope Road P.O. Box 0 New Hope, Kentucky 00 COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT: Barbara A. Kriz Baker Kriz Jenkins Prewitt & Jones, PSC 0 West Vine Street, Suite Lexington, Kentucky 00 ALSO PRESENT: Dr. Michael Cavagnero ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: INDEX DEPONENT: JAMES KRUPA, Ph.D. PAGE EXAMINATION BY: Mr. Surtees... REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE... EXHIBITS NO. DESCRIPTION IDENTIFIED Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation //0 e-mail to Dr. Krupa from Dr. Cavagnero (Above-referenced exhibits accompany original and copy transcripts.) ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: JAMES KRUPA, Ph.D. having been first duly placed under oath, was examined and testified as follows: EXAMINATION BY MR. SURTEES: Q. Would you state your name for the record, please. A. James Krupa. Q. Dr. Krupa, my name is Geoffrey Surtees. I'm one of Martin Gaskell's attorneys in this lawsuit currently pending against the University of Kentucky -- A. Uh-huh. Q. -- here in the Eastern District of Kentucky. Have you ever had your deposition taken before? A. No. Haven't. Q. Okay. I'm sure you've been advised as to what the deposition process is all about. A. Uh-huh. Q. It's a very straightforward affair. A. Uh-huh. Q. I ask you questions and you respond with the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. A. Uh-huh. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: Q. Because the court reporter is taking down everything we say, it is important that we not speak over one another. A. Okay. Q. You let me finish my question before you respond, and I'll let you finish your response before I ask another question. A. That'll be challenging for me, but I'll do my best. Q. Okay. That's fine. MR. MANION: That seems to be the case for him too. MS. KRIZ: And no uh-huhs. Q. That's right. Everything has to be spoken out loud, so you'll have to refrain from uh-huhs and huh-uhs. And so yes and no. Any question? A. It's a whole behavioral shift for me. Notice even then it was a bit of a challenge, but I'll work on it. Q. Maybe by the end we'll be all set. A. Okay. Q. But this is a challenge for everyone including the lawyers. Dr. Krupa, this is not going to take long at all this afternoon, but if at any time you need to ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: take a break just feel free to ask and we will accommodate you. That is no problem. Are you currently on any medication that you think might interfere with your ability to understand my questions and give me truthful answers here today? A. I do not think so. Q. With whom did you speak regarding your deposition here today, if anyone? A. With Barbara. Last Tuesday, was it? Yeah. Q. Did you speak with anyone else regarding today's deposition? A. Oh, that I had a deposition this afternoon, yeah. Q. Did you speak with Dr. Steiner? A. I said I'll see you later today or something to that effect. I passed him in the hall. Q. Did you see Dr. Steiner this afternoon, or today? A. No. Let's see. It would have been probably sometime earlier this morning. Q. Oh, okay. Did you consult any documents in preparation for today's deposition? A. I have the document that Dr. Gaskell ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: released at -- the astronomy/religion document. That's the extent of it. Q. Okay. And any other documents that you brought with you here today? A. Just a few old e-mails, or maybe I didn't bring it. A couple of e-mails from -- or one of the e-mails from back in 0. Q. Okay. Great. And you produced these documents on your own from your own computer; is that correct? A. Yeah, uh-huh. Q. And any of the writings is all your writing; is that correct? A. Yeah. Yes. MR. SURTEES: Barbara, can we get copies of these here? MS. KRIZ: Yeah. The e-mails, I wasn't sure if you have the actual e-mails. THE WITNESS: This that you sent? MS. KRIZ: Right. THE WITNESS: How to get here today and this. MR. MANION: We'll check out her directions. MS. KRIZ: I'm not going to let you ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: see what I sent to him. MR. SURTEES: That's fine. But I would like to get copies -- actually I'd like to get them now if possible. MS. KRIZ: Okay. MR. SURTEES: Except for anything between the two of you. MS. KRIZ: Yeah. Not from me, but I'll make copies of these. MR. SURTEES: And we'll just go off the record for a second. (Off the record.) Q. Doctor, other than writing the word "rubbish" on a document, which we will mark right now actually -- (Exhibit No. marked.) Q. -- did you make any notes in preparation for today's deposition? A. I did not. Q. Dr. Krupa, could you just give me a -- summarize for me your educational background. A. I have a bachelor's degree from the University of Nebraska at Omaha. I have a master's from the University of Nebraska. I have a Ph.D. from the University of Oklahoma. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: Q. And your professional background as far as teaching and research and publications? A. Oh, my areas are evolution, ecology and animal behavior and some pedagogy. Q. Okay. And where have you taught? A. Well, as a tenure track faculty member here at the University of Kentucky. I was a teaching assistant at University of Nebraska Omaha and University of Oklahoma. Q. I want to -- well let's go ahead and identify Exhibit No.. What is Exhibit No., Dr. Krupa? A. Oh. Q. Yeah, that thing we just marked. A. That is the document Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation, by Martin Gaskell. Q. Okay. When was the first time you saw that document? A. Oh, would have been back in 0, October 0. Q. Okay. And how did you come to find that document? A. Dr. Osborn forwarded it to me. Q. And let's just go ahead and identify that. Take a look at what we've marked Exhibit Osborn. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: A. Okay. Q. Is that the e-mail that Dr. Osborn forwarded to you from Dr. Cavagnero? I'm sorry, just the first page. A. Oh, okay. Yes. Q. So just the first page of Exhibit is what Dr. Osborn forwarded to you. Correct? A. Uh-huh. Yes. Q. And then from that e-mail you went to that website; is that correct? A. If I recall, yes. Q. And the website that is set out in Exhibit Osborn is Exhibit Krupa; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Prior to receiving that e-mail from Dr. Osborn, had you ever heard of Dr. Martin Gaskell before? A. I did. Q. Okay. And in what connection? A. He gave a lecture in Memorial Hall sometime in the mid '0s. Q. If I told you in -- that the lecture took place in, would you have -- A. That would make sense. Q. Okay. And do you know who invited Dr. -- ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 00 got to wait for me to finish my question. You were about to do it. Do you know who invited Dr. Gaskell to give that lecture in at Memorial Hall at the University of Kentucky? A. Well, it's been so long ago. I assume the physics department. Q. Okay. Why do you assume the physics department? A. I'm not sure what other department would invite an astronomer. Q. Okay. And do you know whether or not he was invited to give a lecture on a particular topic or whether or not he was invited to just give the lecture and to lecture about whatever he wanted? Do you know how the subject of his lecture came about? A. I do not know, but the advertisement, which is of great interest to me, it was a lecture on how science and religion can go hand and hand. The specific title I do not recall. Q. And do you know whether or not it was that subject that Dr. Gaskell was asked to lecture on, or do you know whether or not that was Dr. Gaskell's idea to lecture on that? A. Have no idea. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 Q. Okay. And you said the advertisement was of great interest to you? A. Yes. Q. Why? A. I am very interested in science, science education. I'm very concerned about the antiscience attitude in this country, and anybody who can talk to us about how it is that whatever reason people fear science or reject science, if they can help us alleviate that problem, I'm very much interested in the topic. Q. And prior to that lecture -- which you attended. Correct? A. (Witness nods head.) Q. Prior to that lecture did you speak to anyone about that lecture in the physics department, for example? A. I did not. Q. Did you speak with anyone in the biology department about the forthcoming lecture? A. Yes. I encouraged graduate students to attend the talk. Q. Okay. Did you speak with any other faculty members about that lecture? A. I don't recall. Q. And you went to the lecture. Correct? ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 A. Yes. Q. And did you arrive before the lecture began? A. Probably a few minutes. Q. A few minutes before the lecture began? A. Yeah. Yes. Q. Did anyone accompany you to the lecture? A. Well, there were several grad students. I don't remember all of whom they might be, but I do remember two individuals that were there, one being Greg Atkisson, who was -- I don't remember if he would have been biology staff at that time or still a graduate student, but also Kevin Hopper, who -- again, they're both graduate students, were graduate students in our department, so they were there. There were others, but those are the two I remember. Q. Okay. And do you remember where it was held? A. Memorial Hall. Q. Memorial Hall. And it was held in the evening, the afternoon? Do you remember? A. Sometime in the evening. Don't remember the specific time. Q. Sure. What do you remember Dr. Gaskell saying during the course of this lecture prior to the ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 question-and-answer period? A. Well, the entire talk was comparing aspects of science to Genesis. I thought it was all very interesting. The thing that caught my attention at the end of the talk, he said either there's no evidence for evolution or very little evidence for evolution. And that stuck out very sharply. Q. Okay. And other than -- I'm sorry, what was the phrase you used? It stuck out? A. Yes. Q. And why did that stick out? A. It was an inaccurate statement. Q. Okay. Do you recall any other inaccurate statements in that lecture other than that one? A. I do not recall any others. Q. Okay. So to the best of your recollection, the only statement that you can remember that you believed was inaccurate was a remark along the lines of there is little or no evidence for evolution? A. Correct. Q. Do you remember what his exact words were? A. I do not. I didn't write it down. So I don't know either or, either one of those comments is inaccurate. Q. Have you ever seen a transcript of this -- ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 of the lecture? A. No. Q. Or you ever hear an audio recording of it? A. No. Q. And that stuck out in your mind. Did you -- from what we understand, you may have asked Dr. Gaskell about that at the end of the lecture? A. There was a ten-minute break until question and answer. I was going to head off right then and there. I stayed. I had the first question. I don't remember many of the specifics other than I was -- I was rather upset by that statement and questioned it. Q. Okay. And how did you question it? A. I don't remember many of the details. I do remember responding as to the inaccuracy of it, and I don't remember all of his responses. The one that sticks out most clearly was he said: You do agree with me that there are few or no transitional forms. Which is grossly inaccurate, and I did respond to that at length. There are various other comments that are classic antievolution comments. I can't remember them specifically. That one sticks out the most because we had the most lengthy exchange on that. Q. I'm sorry, the most lengthy exchange was whether or not there are transitional...? ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 A. Forms. Q. Forms. Okay. What does that mean? A. That means a specimen that shows an evolutionary transition between say a fish and an amphibian, between an amphibian and a reptile, between a reptile and a mammal, something of that sort. Q. And it is your position or the position of science that there are transitional forms? A. It is the position of science and it is the evidence that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of transitional forms. Q. Did you understand Dr. Gaskell to be saying that he disagreed with the idea that there are transitional forms? A. Well, that's the assumption if when asked the question you do agree there are few transitional forms. And, you know, that's -- the question suggests that it's thought that there aren't. Q. Okay. Anything else that you can remember from the question-and-answer period? A. Not specifically. Q. Did you leave -- or did you start to leave in the middle of Dr. Gaskell responding to one of your questions? A. Oh, no. We were all done. I was late. I ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 needed to get home. I needed to take care of my dogs, so when I was finished, I sat there. I think Greg Atkisson asked the second question, and at some point I just needed to get out of there. And he did ask me not to leave. And it was not -- inappropriate to explain that my dogs were in bad need of my -- and I hadn't planed to stay for question and answer. I really had no intention. Q. So Dr. Gaskell asked you not to leave? A. Correct. Q. What did you say? A. I don't recall. Q. Did you leave anyway, or did you sit back down? A. I think I sat down for a little bit longer, but I did have to go. I did definitely before questions and answers were over. Q. So from what I can -- again, just to sum up, I want to be sure I have everything. Again, this is not a test or I'm not trying to trick. I just want to be sure we can remember or get for the record everything that you can recall about that lecture. Something that Dr. Gaskell said that really stuck out in your mind was a remark along the lines of there's little or no evidence for evolution? ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 And then -- for the lecture, that generally is all you can remember except for the fact that it dealt with Genesis and science and astronomy? A. Oh, I remember pictures of Galileo and various scientists. Again, it's been so long and what I heard sounded wonderful. Q. So everything else Dr. Gaskell was saying other than the remark about evolution and there being little or no evidence for it, you thought was wonderful? Is that... A. As best I can recall. Q. All right. And so it was just the one remark, little or no evolution? A. The one remark. Q. During that presentation, and actually in either the presentation or the question-and-answer period, did Dr. Gaskell bring up intelligent design? A. Oh, I can't specifically recall. His responses to me were very much classic creationist responses, the no transitional form being the main one. If that phrase surfaced, I do not recall. Q. Look at Krupa Exhibit No., if you would. When did you last read that, most recently read that? A. Probably last Tuesday. Q. Okay. And while you were reading it would ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 it be fair to say that the general nature of that paper, Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation, was the general outline of Dr. Gaskell's talk? A. It seemed similar. I did not read this over. I scanned it looking for some of the comments that I remember being objectionable that were outlined in these e-mails from 0. But the title sounds quite a bit like what he was talking about in Memorial Hall. Q. And you mentioned the pictures of Galileo. A. Yes. Q. And then this document, Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation mentions Galileo, right, and other famous scientists; is that correct? A. Oh, if it does, I'm not sure. Again, I was gleaning it for certain comments. But yeah, I see right here we do have them all, Kepler, Galileo, Herschel, Einstein. Q. When you were gleaning this document, did you find anything in here regarding transitional forms? A. I don't know that I did. I highlighted in green the things that jumped out at me. I don't see them in the sections that I highlighted, but again, I haven't read them over. I have not read this document over in detail. Q. Okay. Anything else that you remember ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 about the lecture in by Dr. Gaskell? A. Really not much. It's been so long ago. Q. After the conclusion of that lecture was it -- did you walk away thinking Dr. Gaskell was antievolution? A. Well, to say that there is little or no evidence for evolution is inaccurate and would suggest that. But it is an inaccurate statement that needs to be addressed. Q. What about -- would you have characterized Dr. Gaskell as a creationist? A. His responses were the responses that classic creationists give, no transitional forms. Q. What is a creationist? A. It's certainly somebody who is -- does not accept evolution. There are several forms. There could be -- Louis Agassiz was a special creationist. So he felt that life forms appeared as they are now on multiple occasions. The general notion is that life forms did not evolve but exist now as they originally appeared. Q. And so would you say that is intellectually irreconcilable, to be a creationist and a person who accepts the theory or fact of evolution? A. Well, evolution is both theory and fact, ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: first of all. It is -- those who have creationist's arguments certainly are not evolutionary biologists. Q. Okay. After receiving the e-mail from Dr. Cavagnero that he had originally addressed to Dr. Osborn, did you speak with Dr. Osborn regarding that e-mail from Dr. Cavagnero? A. Well, we had a couple e-mail exchanges. I think I was giving an exam that week, so I did not really look at the document terribly carefully, but then whenever -- a couple of e-mails that followed, I did look at it and found probably most of these comments that I have highlighted now. Q. Okay. So the comments that you have -- that are highlighted in Exhibit, Krupa, are you saying those are probably the same things you highlighted back when you first looked at this document? A. Most likely because atheistic evolution jumped out, if I recall. The comment on intelligent design did jump out. The comment, wherever it is, about how that evolutionary biologists would be out of jobs, wherever that is in here. Q. Okay. Well, we can go through that in detail, and we will go in to that in detail. I don't mean to cut you off. Because we're going to do that later we'll proceed with where we are now. But those ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: comments that you just now highlighted, you don't remember Dr. Gaskell saying those during the lecture. Right? A. Again, I don't recall much. It was that one statement that he made at the end of the talk. Q. Okay. And did you say there was an e-mail exchange between you and Dr. Osborn? A. Well, they're the ones that I assume you have. There are a couple where I think -- I can't recall. I think I mentioned that I'd look at the statement, and then I responded to his e-mails saying that he made good points or something to that effect. But I have not looked at those e-mails for a while. MR. SURTEES: Off the record for a second. (Off-the-record discussion.) MR. SURTEES: We can go back on record. Q. So Dr. Krupa, we were just -- off the record we were discussing some e-mail exchanges that you had with Dr. Osborn and with Dr. Cavagnero. Correct? And you're going to see if you can find those e-mails and produce them to counsel for the University of Kentucky; is that correct? A. Correct. And I will have them. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: Q. Great. Thank you very much. Other than the e-mail exchanges, did you have any verbal discussions with Dr. Osborn regarding the e-mail from Dr. Cavagnero and his requests that at least Dr. Osborn assessed the scientific credibility of Dr. Gaskell and his website? A. I can't give you any specifics, but I'm sure we did. Q. Okay. But you don't remember any details at all? A. No, I don't. Q. Can't approximate? A. And I'm assuming we had conversations. Just as much as I talk, I can't imagine we didn't. Q. In the coffee room, perhaps? A. Possibly. Q. We heard about that earlier this morning. That's the only reason why I ask. A. Oh, okay. Q. What about with Dr. Steiner? Did you speak with Dr. Steiner regarding Dr. Cavagnero's e-mail requests to the biologists? A. And again, I'm certain that I did. Now, can I recall any specific time or conversation. I can't. But I'm certain that we did. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: Q. Okay. I believe you said at the time you read this, Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation, you thought -- or it was your opinion that Dr. Gaskell was a creationist. Correct? A. Well, there are definite inconsistent statements with what we know in evolutionary biology. Q. So he would therefore be a creationist? A. Well, at the time I didn't connect this document with the person that spoke in. It took probably a day before I realized they're one and the same. But there are the classic problems of making evolution sound like it is atheism, so this atheistic evolution comment. The only individuals that make those kinds of comments are those who are opposed to evolution. So be they creationists or whatever, typically it's somebody who has some support for creationism. Q. And again, I believe you said that, and correct me if I'm wrong, that Dr. Gaskell was antievolution. Correct? It was your understanding that he would be antievolution? A. When somebody says there is little or no evidence of evolution, I don't know how else to take it but that. Q. So the support -- the idea that ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: Dr. Gaskell is antievolution comes from that statement from the lecture. Correct? A. Correct. Q. At least according to your recollection. Is there anything in Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation, which we have identified Exhibit No., Krupa, which indicates that Dr. Gaskell is antievolution? A. I think the more significant point is that there are several inaccurate statements about evolution, on whichever page, where there are significant problems on evolutionary theory. Q. I'm sorry, if you could stop for just one second and identify where you are. A. Page, second to the last paragraph, whole paragraph. So it's the part that I highlighted with the word "rubbish." Q. Oh, okay. A. "It is true that there are significant scientific problems in evolutionary theory (a good thing or else many biologists and geologists would be out of a job." That is a line that you hear repeatedly by those who are antievolution and who are in support of creationism. Q. So would you say that's sort of guilt by association? I mean, does Dr. Gaskell there say -- do ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: you take that line to mean that Dr. Gaskell is antievolution, or do you take Dr. Gaskell to be antievolution because people who are antievolution say things like this? A. People who say things like this are antievolution. From my experience. Q. Okay. But -- and so you wouldn't say that this is -- this leads to the conclusion that Dr. Gaskell is antievolution? A. Well, it leads to the conclusion that I'd be very worried about somebody making these statements because of their inaccuracy. Q. Any other statements in here which would lead -- that led you to believe that Dr. Gaskell was antievolution? A. Well, everything that I have highlighted here, this inaccurate comment on the first page, this comment of atheistic evolution which -- Q. I'm sorry, before you keep going, let's just look at that. What did you highlight there? A. "Which exponents of atheist evolution claim." So that's not his statement, that's a summary. But you see that and you'd like to read on because saying "atheistic evolution" is in itself a statement that in science does not seem appropriate to me. I ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: highlighted a couple of comments on -- Q. I'm sorry to interrupt. Let's dwell on this thing. A. Okay. Q. And we can get to all the other stuff. But could he not -- when he says atheistic evolution, could he be making a statement which is not necessarily scientific? Could he be making a philosophical point? A. That may be. I don't know. I don't know what's in his mind, but when you see a phrase like that that will for me prompt me to read on. Q. Okay. Now, where were you going to go next? A. Oh, whatever was highlighted. And again, the thing on theory, I always check to see if people use the word correctly or not, but it is page with these comments that there are significant problems in evolutionary theory, which there are not. Q. There are no -- I'm sorry. A. It's one of the cornerstones of science. It's hypothesis testing. To say that there are significant problems. I'm an evolutionary biologist. I have no clue what that means, what they are. Q. Do you think there's a distinction between saying problems with evolutionary theory and problems in ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: evolutionary theory? A. "With" versus "in"? Hard to say. The statement itself is inaccurate. Q. Are there problems in evolutionary theory that remain to be resolved? A. All science is continuing to answer more questions. That will happen in any branch of science forever. So when one -- if one claims that all issues in nature are now answered by evolutionary theory, we're still answering. Q. So there are still problems to be solved in evolutionary theory? A. Yes. MS. KRIZ: Let me object to the -- you use the term "problems," and I guess we need to have an understanding of what we're talking about in terms of problems. So I would object to the form of your question. MR. SURTEES: Can you read the last question and answer back, please? (Last question and answer read.) A. Well, not in the theory, but in evolution, the discipline. Q. Okay. In the discipline of -- okay. But could one say and be perfectly in your ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: mind scientifically respectable in saying that I have no problems with evolutionary theory, however there are problems in evolutionary theory which need to be resolved? A. And that's not the way I took this question. Q. Well, I know. I'm not -- A. This comment. But it still goes back to the Memorial Hall comment, which was very clear. Q. I understand. But again, if you could answer that question I asked. MR. SURTEES: Could you repeat it? A. Ask it again. (Question and answer read on page, line.) A. Again, problems as questions to be answered. There are questions to be answered. Q. Okay. Thank you. All right. Now, were you going to flip to another -- A. I think on page is the main section. Let's see. On page, again these aren't -- let's see. Also classic comments that we hear towards the bottom of page : Science has no satisfactory explanation for the origin of life yet. Note that the question of origin of ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: 0 of - Page ID#: life is a separate problem from the question of validity of some theories of evolution. So that was -- that is correct. So I highlighted that. Mostly that was something that concerned evolution so I highlighted anything in here last week. Q. Okay. I'm sorry, so real quick there, Dr. Krupa, on page, the passage you just read you believe is correct; is that what you said? A. Well, that there is -- what's correct is that research on origins of life is a separate research area from evolution, and he says that, so that is correct. Q. And is it correct to say that the evidence is very good and gets stronger every year that all life on earth descended; i.e., evolved from a common origin? A. All evidence right now indicates common origin. Q. And anything else you highlighted? A. Well, let's see. On page I highlighted it. I haven't really looked at this again, so I'll read it and see what I thought about it. "This is probably a good place to state that I personally have no theoretical [sic] problem with the idea of God doing things in a way -- in ways described in modern theories ACTION COURT REPORTERS 0
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: of evolution, "theistic evolution." So I highlighted that because, well, it jumped out. Q. Okay. And it jumped out why? A. Well, he's making comments on evolution, so I tried to highlight any comments here that pertained to evolution. Q. I think you described -- you stated earlier, Dr. Krupa, that you thought Dr. Gaskell was antievolution. What do you think of this remark where he says, "This is probably a good place to state that I personally have no theological problem with the idea of God doing things in the ways described in modern theories of evolution"? A. That is the views of those that consider themselves a theistic evolution, and that's fine by me. Q. And is that different from creationism? A. It is different, yes. So all the denominations, Christian denominations in this country who accept evolution would classify themselves as theistic evolution. So they can accept the science of evolution and they can believe in God. Q. So in this remark you would have no problems with Dr. Gaskell? A. I have no problems with this comment. Q. Yeah, this comment, sure. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: Getting back to -- oh, any other materials or passages in Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation which you believe indicates that Dr. Gaskell is a creationist? A. Again, I haven't read it in detail for years, so if there are I have not seen these. Q. Okay. Anything else? And again, I understand you haven't read it in a while. Well, you read it last week, but you just skimmed it. Correct? A. Correct. Q. That indicate that Dr. Gaskell is antievolution? Any other passages that would support that idea? A. Well, inaccurate statements about evolution suggests that. Q. Even though we -- okay. Anything else that you've read by Dr. Martin Gaskell other than Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation? A. I have not read anything. Q. You haven't read any? A. No. Q. Did you look at any other items on his website? A. I have not. Well, I take that back. I ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: noticed that he runs marathons. Q. Oh, okay. When did you see that? A. Oh, probably would have been about the same time I got this or maybe a few days before, I don't totally recall. Q. Do you run marathons? A. Yeah, he runs -- I don't, but he did. I thought that was quite excellent. (Off-the-record comments.) MR. SURTEES: Back on the record here. Q. Dr. Krupa, I am going to -- MR. SURTEES: If we could mark that. (Exhibit No. marked.) Q. The top of this page and -- Dr. Krupa is the document in front of you four pages long? A. Correct. Q. Okay. Just want to be sure. Now, at the top of page, looks like it's an e-mail from Mike Cavagnero to you, subject line reading, regarding two items. In this e-mail from Mike to you it says: Jim, I understand completely and am grateful for your comments. Mike. And below that it says Krupa, James J. wrote, and then we have the series of carets which appear to be your e-mail to Cavagnero, to which he is responding here; is that correct? ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: A. Correct. Q. And can you just look through your e-mail here, your copied e-mail, and tell me whether or not to the best of your recollection that is everything you said in that e-mail to Dr. Cavagnero. A. Correct, that is what I said. Q. Now, you start off by saying: Greetings, Mark. I assume you meant Mike? A. Yeah. Scatterbrained. Q. Sure. A. I managed to misspell a number of names. Yeah. That's busy days. Q. Sure. And you also -- can we agree where you reference Gaskin in this e-mail that that means Gaskell? A. Yes, correct. Q. So you sent this e-mail to Dr. Cavagnero and you state: I do hope the committee will consider the e-mail Jeff sent seriously. Did you mean Jeff Osborn? A. Correct. Q. And the e-mail that Jeff sent, does that begin on page of Krupa Exhibit No.? A. Yes. Q. Did you agree with everything Jeff said in ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: that e-mail? A. Yes. Q. And you say: To have an antievolution scientist come to U.K. and be involved with science outreach will be a disaster despite the person's area of science. We've covered this, but just to be sure, when you wrote this e-mail to Dr. Cavagnero, was it your position that Dr. Gaskell was antievolution? A. Based on a Memorial Hall comment, yes. Q. So based solely on the Memorial Hall comment? Is that -- A. Well, it was reinforced by the statements that Jeff Osborn highlighted. Q. So based on the Memorial Hall lecture and the passages that Jeff Osborn highlighted, you came to the conclusion that Dr. Gaskell is an antievolution scientist? A. I came to the conclusion that what he would be saying would be inaccurate with what we know in evolutionary biology, and that would be a problem. Q. Okay. Well, here you say -- so when you say to have an antievolution scientist, you weren't necessarily referring to Dr. Gaskell? A. Those are my comments in general. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: Q. You then go on: I've heard Gaskin bash evolution. (Evolution is the unification theory of all biology.) I'm sure you've already answered the question, but I just have to cover all the bases. Where and when have you heard Gaskell bash evolution? A. Memorial Hall. Little or no evidence for evolution. Q. Okay. And is that the only place you heard Dr. Gaskell bash evolution? A. That I heard him, yes. Q. And where have you read Dr. Gaskell bash evolution? A. Well, again, these are the comments that Jeff highlighted, three points, that were not consistent with evolutionary biology. Intelligent design being one of those. Q. Sure. And again, going back now to Krupa Exhibit No., Modern Astronomy, the Bible, and Creation, where in this paper in your opinion does Dr. Gaskell bash evolution? A. Well, these comments, again on page, where there are problems that are not being made out in introductory biology/geology courses. That's simply biologically inaccurate. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: Q. Okay. And you think he's bashing evolution there? A. Well, to make inaccurate statements about evolution to me is bashing. Q. Okay. "We might as well have folks in the creation museum get involved with U.K. science outreach efforts," you go on to say. Correct? A. Yes. Q. And then the next paragraph: I know that -- let me just read it ahead before I read it all. Second full paragraph: I know that if Biology had the opportunity to hire the greatest geneticist that exists and one with multiple Nobel prizes who also was going around lecturing on the age of earth being,000 years, I would fight to prevent the hire. A. Correct. Q. Was it your understanding that Dr. Gaskell believed the age of the earth was,000 years? A. I was giving that as an example of how I would really speak out against anybody who is making inaccurate scientific statements. Not reference to Gaskell at all, but in general, because we do have such individuals around. Q. Okay. What do you mean by that last ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: remark "we have such individuals around"? A. We have a faculty member on the U.K. campus that gives talks against evolution. He's tenured. He has made reference to the earth being young. Q. And who is this professor? A. His name is Art Nitz. Q. What department does he work for? A. Physical therapy. Q. And you go on: With all the problems we have in improving science education, Gaskin -- or Gaskell -- will only set us back. And then you continue. "And he WILL bash evolution!" Correct? A. Correct. Q. And your basis for stating that is what? A. Memorial Hall comments. Q. So is it -- so based on that lecture, which took place ten years prior to you sending this e-mail, you were of the belief that Dr. Gaskell would bash evolution? A. If he made that public comment in Memorial Hall, there's no reason to assume that that would not happen again. Q. Assuming that what your account of what ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: Dr. Gaskell said is correct, what he said about evolution at Memorial Hall is correct, is it possible that he could have changed his mind between then and at the time you wrote this e-mail? A. I have no way to know that. Anything is possible, but I have no way to know that. Q. And then you continue. "He did" -- I take it that that means bash evolution -- "when he spoke here many years ago at Memorial Hall." We've discussed that. "I really ripped in to him during question-answer period, and his responses only got more ridiculous and more creationist in nature." A. Correct. Q. And that's an accurate assessment. Right? A. Correct. Q. Which you believe to be an accurate assessment? A. Correct. Q. Who else did you -- I think we -- MS. KRIZ: Let me ask off the record. (Off-the-record discussion.) Q. Back on the record here. I just have some general questions here for you, Dr. Krupa. I'm looking for any and all conversations that you had regarding Dr. Gaskell with a number of individuals. So we're ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: 0 of - Page ID#: going to go through some names here. A. Okay. Q. I believe we already spoke about Dr. Osborn. Can you remember any details of any conversations you had with Dr. Osborn regarding Dr. Gaskell? A. I can't remember any specifics at all, other than it would have been on these points that he e-mailed. Q. Sure. Any conversations regarding Dr. Gaskell with Dr. Cavagnero? A. We've never -- I think this is the first time we've spoken in person. Q. Okay. Over the phone? A. Never over the phone. Q. Any conversations regarding Dr. Gaskell with Dean Hoch? A. I have never spoken to Dean Hoch about this. I don't think I've ever spoken to him face-to-face or on the phone either. I don't get out much. Q. Any conversations with Provost Subbaswamy regarding Dr. Gaskell? A. I have never spoken to him in life, in person, over the phone. This is shedding a bad light on ACTION COURT REPORTERS 0
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: 0 me, isn't it? MR. MANION: Not really. THE WITNESS: Stay under the radar of the administrators. Q. Any conversations with Dr. Gaskell -- I'm sorry, any conversations about Dr. Gaskell with anyone in the physics and astronomy department? A. Never. Well, let me reiterate. After the Memorial Hall talk when I was leaving, in the foyer a number of people, I don't know who they are, I assume they are astronomy folks from the department, and I did speak to them that I thought it was very inappropriate for someone who is not an evolutionary biologist to publicly say there's little or no evidence for evolution. I remember distinctly making that comment -- I don't know who the individual was -- and then I left. Q. And did the individual respond to you? A. Probably. What would the response have been? I do not remember. Q. Any other conversations from that evening of the lecture at Memorial Hall that you can recall either prior to or after the lecture? A. Oh, I'm sure I probably spoke to several in the biology department, probably grad students that I was quite upset about hearing somebody publicly say ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: there was little to no evidence for evolution. So that will come up. Who those individuals might have been, I can't even begin to remember. I talk a lot, so it would probably be several people. Q. Any conversations regarding Dr. Gaskell with somebody by the name of Patty Bender? A. I don't know who Patty Bender is. Q. Any conversations regarding Dr. Gaskell with anyone else in the scientific community outside the University of Kentucky? A. I do not remember any specific conversations about Gaskell in particular. Q. Do you stay in touch with anyone at the University of Nebraska? A. I stay in touch with folks at the University of Nebraska Omaha, which is the separate -- that's the Omaha campus. So I'm in fairly close touch with a couple of folks there. Q. And have you spoken with any of them about Dr. Gaskell? A. I would highly doubt it. Q. Other than the e-mails that we have looked at this morning, have you ever written about Dr. Martin Gaskell in an e-mail or an article or in any writing at all? ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: A. I don't think that I did. I can't give you an example. I doubt that I would have. Q. Dr. Krupa, who is Eugenie Scott? A. Jeanie Scott is the head of the National Center for Science Education. Q. And what is the National Center for Science Education? A. Oh, it's the organization that defends science education. It defends education of evolutionary biology. Q. Do they do good work in your opinion? A. I think so. I think so. Q. Is it Dr. Eugenie Scott; do you know? A. Yes. She was a faculty member here at the University of Kentucky. Q. And would you say that she's on top of this whole evolution issue with respect to education? A. She should be. That's the job. Q. That's her job. Do you know whether or not actually their mission statement is that they are wholly dedicated to defending the teaching of evolution in the public schools? A. That sounds correct. MR. SURTEES: Dr. Krupa, we're going to take a few minutes' break here. ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: THE WITNESS: Okay. (Off the record.) MR. SURTEES: No further questions. MS. KRIZ: No further questions. You're free to go. (DEPOSITION CONCLUDED :.) ACTION COURT REPORTERS
Case: :0-cv-00-KSF-REW Doc #: Filed: 0// Page: of - Page ID#: STATE OF KENTUCKY ) COUNTY OF FAYETTE ) I, ANN HUTCHISON, Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public, State of Kentucky at Large, whose commission as such will expire May,, do hereby certify that the foregoing deposition was taken by me at the time, place, for the purpose and with the appearances set forth herein; that the same was taken down by me in stenotype in the presence of the witness and thereafter correctly transcribed by me upon computer; and that the witness was duly placed under oath by me prior to giving testimony. I further certify that I am not related to nor employed by any of the parties to this action or their respective counsel and have no interest in this litigation. Given under my hand, this nd day of April,. ANN HUTCHISON, RPR Registered Professional Reporter Notary Public, State-at-Large ACTION COURT REPORTERS