Well it seems that you have a problem with rational argument.
It is impossible to prove that something is not mentioned without quoting the entire article. Since that would be both a copyright violation and an abuse of this board I did not do so. If you wish to claim that the donation of was specifically reviewed based on the article it is up to you to produce the quotes - because that IS possible without violating copyright or abusing the board. But you did not.
2) I do not need to argue that the transcript is misquoted - it could, for instance be incorrect.
3) The fact that there was no mention of a review refutes your claim that the article states that there was such a review.
So here is a question - was
Pandas and People reviewed for scientific accuracy ? By qualified people ?
York Daily Record
Nilsen said Friday that the books had to be reviewed to determine their educational appropriateness and to make sure they’re scientifically accurate.
And please understand that if you don't like something that doesn't make it true. No matter how much you object to the fact ID as science is just a way-out speculation that hasn't got anywhere it remains a fact. IF you want to argue otherwise then produce the evidence to the contrary - don't just complain that you hate what people are saying.