[vannevar]

"Here again it is important to note that 'controversial subjects' should be taught if they are germane to the topic but taught without bias. To take the subject of 'anthropogenic climate change' I mentioned above it should be possible for two students to achieve similar grades if one of them supports the thesis while the other denies it as long as both use sound arguments to come to their conclusions."

In principle, of course everyone would agree with this. In this particular instance though, there is no known scientifically "sound argument" against anthropogenic climate change. The appearance of controversy is entirely manufactured, just as the case for the healthfulness of cigarettes was manufactured in the 60s, and for the same reasons: the protection of entrenched economic interests. And because this is a law, and the Texas state government controls the massive state funding of the University of Texas, the application of this law will be purely political. Could a valid argument against the anthropogenic hypothesis ultimately emerge? It seems unlikely, but it's possible. This law will preclude anyone coming up with it, however, because any flimsy argument in line with the views of Texas' current regime will be accepted as valid. There is very little market for scientific truth in Texas right now.