Za one koji nemaju pristup ovo je kopija samo teksta:

Anti-evolutionists raise their profile in Europe

The teaching of alternative theories to evolution in schools is not just an issue in the United States. Almut Graebsch and Quirin Schiermeier assess whether creationism is threatening science in Europe. Being a trained biologist doesn't stop Maciej Giertych from insisting that evolution is a falsified hypothesis1. The 70-year-old Polish member of the European parliament, who has a PhD in tree physiology, also wants to spread the word. In October, he organized a workshop for parliamentarians entitled "Teaching evolution theory in Europe: is your child being indoctrinated in the classroom?" Although the teaching of evolution has become a highly politicized and hotly discussed matter in the United States, such moves are rare in Europe, and Giertych's activities have so far met with little response in Strasbourg or Brussels. But a number of similar incidents over the past couple of years, in various countries, are raising fears among the scientific community that creationism may be on the rise in Europe. Last month, for example, it emerged that creationism is being taught at two schools in the German state of Hesse. The incident, albeit minor, has provoked debate in the country. The Christian view of creation should at least be discussed in science classes, argues Karin Wolf, Hesse's Christian Democrat education minister. But the Association of German Biologists warns of the dangers of blurring the division between science and religion. And in Britain in September, the prominent creationist group Truth in Science sent information packs to every UK secondary school. The material suggests intelligent design should be taught as an alternative to the theory of evolution, although the UK government's education department was quick to say that it does not endorse its use in science classes. The teaching of evolution theory is under threat in some European countries. In response, a group called the British Centre for Science Education has been formed to campaign against the teaching of creationism in schools. Meanwhile, British school leavers' knowledge about evolution is considered so poor, and creationist ideas so widespread, that the universities of Leeds and Leicester are planning to introduce remedial courses next year for first-year science students. Steve Jones, a geneticist at University College London who has lectured widely about evolution, is one of those concerned by the growing influence of creationist groups. "I have talked about evolution in front of more than 100,000 British schoolchildren in the past 20 years ? during most of that time I was never asked questions about creationism," he says. "But in the past couple of years, wherever I go I am asked about it." He ascribes the change largely to the activities of groups such as Truth in Science. But perhaps the most blatant attempt to ban evolution from the classrooms occurred in Italy in 2004. Letizia Moratti, then education minister, caused a public outcry when she removed the theory of evolution from the curricula of Italy's middle schools2 on the grounds that teaching Darwin's theory of evolution can instil a materialist view of life in young minds. Following widespread protest, the education ministry partially reintroduced darwinism into school courses. A recent study by Observa Science in Society, a Vicenza-based body that promotes informed debate on scientific issues, shows that only 11% of Italians support the exclusion of darwinism from curricula. But almost two-thirds would prefer lessons to cover both evolutionary theory and the creationist view. "Italy is no longer a completely secular country," says Telmo Pievani, a philosopher of science at the University of Milan II in Italy. "We are facing a dramatic and worrying cultural and political regression." Creationism is a major issue in Turkish politics; the debate is much more tense than in the United States. In Russia, meanwhile, creationist societies are receiving strong support from the Protestant minority. Besides translating the writings of European and US creationists, Russian groups conduct their own 'creation research'. In Moscow, for example, the ARCTUR Research Geological Lab is looking for geological and geochemical proof of creationism. The society collaborates with creationists in the West and promotes its findings in several Russian and English-language creationist journals. Such examples illustrate the complexity of the issue in Europe compared with the United States. Whereas the US drive towards creationism comes mainly from Protestant fundamentalist groups, the European movement has diverse roots. "There is an aggressive anti-darwinism inspired by radical Islamic minorities in immigrant communities in Britain and France; there is a Catholic creationism growing in Poland; there is Protestant creationism in some schools in England," says Pievani. The Koran is less clear than the Bible on divine creation. But that does not mean Islam accepts evolution, and the influence of Islamic creationist groups in countries such as Britain and France is increasing. The movement is by far the strongest in Turkey, however, which is in negotiations to join the European Union. The main Muslim creationist organization, the Turkish Bilim ve Aras¸tirma Vakfi, distributes creationist literature in Turkey and elsewhere that often consists of material translated from Christian fundamentalist groups, particularly the Institute for Creation Research, based in North Santee, California. Prominent US creationists are also frequently invited by the group to give talks. Jones has just returned from the Istanbul book fair, where he says many creationist publications were on sale, and proving extremely popular. "Creationism is a major issue in Turkish politics; the debate is much more tense than in the United States," he says. "All biology textbooks now used in schools are creationist in tone." There is debate over the size of the threat posed to science in Europe by the various creationist movements. The creationists' main goal is to have their views included in school curricula. But, unlike in the United States, many pupils in European schools receive religious education anyway and are therefore familiar with the theme of divine creation. Some think this may steal the thunder of the creationist movement in Europe ? why force creationism into science classes if it is already taught in religious education? It annoys and depresses me that intelligent students persist in holding irrational views. Moreover, Europeans do seem to be more enlightened than Americans when it comes to evolution. According to a 2005 US study3, just 40% of Americans accepted the theory of evolution, down from 45% in 1985. In Europe, that figure has increased, from 65% in 1992 to 70% in 2005, although numbers vary widely across the region4. Others warn that scientists can't afford to be complacent. "The anti-evolution movement does undermine public understanding of science," argues Ulrich Kutschera, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Kassel in Germany and vice-president of the Association of German Biologists. "In Germany and other European countries, anti-evolutionists with different religious backgrounds promote their ideology via colourful web pages that are appealing to students and people without a scientific background. Perception of evolutionary biology, in particular, is seriously undermined by these activities." He suggests that biologists should devote more time to counteracting its spread by explaining their theories to the public. Jones says that, despite his dislike of creationism ? "it annoys and depresses me that intelligent students persist in holding irrational views" ? he doesn't think that such arguments are set to undermine science in countries such as Britain. "But I am not so optimistic about Turkey."

References Giertych, M. Nature 444, 265 (2006). | Article | PubMed | ChemPort | Nature 428, 595 (2004). Miller, J. D. et al. Science 313, 765?766 (2006). | Article | PubMed | ChemPort | Special Eurobarometer Europeans, Science & Technology http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_224_report_en.pdf (Eur. Comm., 2005).

Komentari (clanova koji su komentirali: 5) Komentara po autoru:    4 2 1 1 1

#1: (Podaci o autoru dostupni clanovima CONNECT-a) 2006-11-23 00:29:34 Puno hvala na prijenosu kompletnog clanka.    Zanimljivo i otuzno, no na jednoj apstraktnoj razini podsjeca na seriju clanaka Vladimira Igorevica Arnolda o buducnosti znanosti u drustvu kakvo je trenutno.    Vecina clanaka nalazi se ovdje, tj. svi osim "On teaching mathematics".    Da citiram clanak Arnold: Polymathematics: is mathematics a set of arts or a single science?    According to Kolmogorov, Hilbert was seriously worried by what would happen to the Mathematische Annalen cover in 500 years : he thought that the names of the former Editors would fill up all the space.     Kolmogorov objected to Hilbert that our culture would probably not survive for such a long period: the united bureaucrats of all countries will soon be able to stop all kind of creativity, making further mathematical discoveries impossible, as are geographical discoveries today.    We can imagine that some of the most appealing domains of mathematics will be transformed into wilderness preserves, where rich people will be able to buy for an expensive price the pleasure to hunt one-two theorems, guided by the scientific jaegermeisters.    It is difficult to decide, which of these predictions is more likely to happen. It seems however rather clear that the centre of the humanity will soon move from wealthy Europe and North America to hungry Asia, where our culture has few chances to survive.    I would like to hope that this prediction is as wrong as the others. Discussing these perspectives, the optimist H.Whitney insisted that America is still producing excellent mathematicians in spite of the sad fact that its general cultural and educational level is already almost as low as that of the future global attractor.    One may also hope that the coming nuclear civil wars and military confrontations will lead to a better appreciation of science by society and to a paradoxical flourishing of world mathematics (similar to the flourishing which occurred in Russia after the awful Bolshevik revolution).      Uz cijeli taj optimizam i iscekivanje slavne buducnosti znanosti, sav ushicen vracam se zavrsavanju diplomskog.           s.m.

#2: (Podaci o autoru dostupni clanovima CONNECT-a) 2006-11-23 18:09:48 Moram priznati da sam uzasnuta sa sve vecim prodiranjem teorije kreacionizma u sve veci dio zemalja u europi. Niti nasa domovina nije nazalost postedjena toga. U zadnjih mjesec dana se u Kulturnom informativnom centru odrzava ciklus predavanja pod nazivom KREACIONIZAM. Zadnje predavanje je odrzano 7.11. uz naslov  KOLAPS DARVINIZMA uz projekciju dokumentarnog filma   dr. PREDRAG BRKIÆ ; dr. DAMIR ZUBÈIÆ; prof. DAVOR MILEVOJ; DAMIR GAL, publicist, su predavaci. Predavanja se odrzavaju u suradnji s Centrom za prirodoslovne studije. Ja nazalost sam imala prilike posjetiti samo 1. u ciklusu tih predavanja na kojem mi nisu dopustili postaviti niti jedno pitanje tim ljudima, kao, pitanja ce biti dopustena na sljedecim predavanjima. Nazalost, nisam nasla vremena da posjetim neko drugo predavanje tako da nisam upoznata sto se dalje zbivalo. Samo znam da su me prestravile neke stvari u vezi toga, a to je kao prvo iznimna posjecenost. Imala sam prilike biti na nekim drugim predavanjima u KIC-u, npr. na predstavljanju hrvatskog prijevoda knjige Vragov Kapelan, Richarda Dawkinsa i jos nekim dogadjajima i moram priznati da su ih kreacionisti uvelike nadmasili po broju posjetitelja. Druga stvar je reklamiranje tih dogadjaja jer sam oglas vidjela objesen na oglasnoj ploci Bioloskog odsjeka, PMF u Zagrebu.  Sad, stvarno me zanima, koliki je stvarni utjecaj tih Kreacionistickih nazora na javnost u Hrvatskoj? Da li to mozemo izignorirati, kao pripadnici znanstvene zajednice, ili bi trebali, na ovom pocetku, reagirati te pokusati osvijestiti javnost da je to gomila sarlatana?  Lako se moze dogoditi da se za nekoliko godina i kod nas pokusa izbaciti teorija evolucije iz nastave u skolama.

#3: (Podaci o autoru dostupni clanovima CONNECT-a) 2006-11-23 19:36:55 Koliko se moze doznati preko Googla, ova gospoda iz #2 su adventisti, dakle relativno malobrojna vjerska skupina u Hrvatskoj, ali vjerovatno s logistikom i potporom njihove internacionale ili vec cega. Imao sam prilike izbliza vidjeti logiku kojom se sluze, a ona je vrlo jednostavna - ako ih slijepo ne slusate osudjeni ste na pakao. Zato uopce ne cudi da na tribinama nije bilo dopusteno postavljati pitanja. Ono sto svakako cudi je da im oglas za predavanje visi na PMF-u, ili ovaj dogadjaj u organizaciji Kluba studenata PMF-a. Kad kreacionizam (u ovom stupnju to je vec fundamentalizam) ne moze u osnovne skole, zasto ih onda pustati na mala vrata na visokoskolske ustanove?

#4: (Podaci o autoru dostupni clanovima CONNECT-a) 2006-11-24 11:46:12 Moram se osvrnuti na navoðenje Æumezovog predavanja. Naime, ovim predavanjem smo htjeli saznati zapravo na koji naèin kreacionisti opravdavaju svoje teorije. Predavanje je bilo jako posjeæeno i na njemu su sudjelovali studenti sa SVIH odsjeka PMF - a.   Ovo predavanje nije niti na kakav naèin htjelo promovirati ideju kreacionizma, veæ jednostavno dati priliku kreacionistima da pred studentima prirodoslovlja poku¹aju argumentirati svoju teoriju. i nama studentima da se s tim "argumentima" upoznamo.    I mislim da je bilo jedno od boljih koje je Æumez ikada organizirao - predavanje je trajalo skoro tri sata i razvila se nevjerojatno ¾ustra rasprava...     I jedan komentar nevezan uz sam tekst - kako se Centar za prirodoslovne studije mo¾e tako zvati??? Nedavno smo na Vijeæu Biolo¹kog odsjeka upoznati s ovom udrugom i tra¾i se naèin da im se onemoguæi upotreba takvog nazivlja, buduæi da prirodoslovlje nije ne¹to èime se oni bave.

#5: (Podaci o autoru dostupni clanovima CONNECT-a) 2006-11-24 14:40:47 Na #4:     U najavi tog predavanja na vasim stranicama pise doslovno: "Vi¹e od 150 godina tzv.slu¾bena ili opæe prihvaæena znanost poku¹ava potisnuti KREACIONIZAM - znanost o stvaranju i proglasiti ga neznanstvenim." Sad covjek moze zamisliti da zvati znanost tzv. sluzbenom ili kreacionizam znanoscu nije vas stav, ali to se iz ovog ne vidi. Kad im se tako tepa, onda se ne treba cuditi sto se sluze prirodoslovljem u nazivu centra, jer ako je kreacionizam znanost, onda se oni bave znanoscu, pa sto nebi bili prirodoslovci? U biti cilj kreacionista i nije rasprava, nego stvaranje dojma u javnosti da stvarno postoji ozbiljna znanstvena prepirka oko evolucije i da se kreacionizam i teorija evolucije moraju u najmanju ruku ravnopravno tretirati.

#6: (Podaci o autoru dostupni clanovima CONNECT-a) 2006-11-24 17:28:38 Ta najava nije nikakav odraz na¹eg mi¹ljenja o temi, veæ je jednostavno raðena u maniri svih ostalih predavanja - predavaè nam ¹alje sa¾etak svoga predavanja i mi od toga radimo najavu.     Zanimljivo je ponovno proèitati komentare studenata na ovo predavanje

#7: (Podaci o autoru dostupni clanovima CONNECT-a) 2006-11-25 02:55:32 Ta manira je poznata vama, ali ne mora biti i svakome tko naidje na vase stranice. I ona je mozda prikladna kad najavljujete predavanja prof. Bjelisa ili dr. Jelenica, ali s ovom ekipom kreacionista ispada nespretno. Njihov je glavni cilj napraviti zabunu u javnosti, a objaviti ovakav tekst na stranici studenata prirodnih znanosti i bez ikakve ograde ih sigurno cini jako zadovoljnima. Meni je apsurdno misliti da se vi slazete s njima, ali netko neupucen to moze s pravom zakljuciti. Ako samo prenesete neciji sazetak, onda se srecom nisu sjetili napisati i da je starost zemlje 5700 godina (i to je jedna od njihovih tvrdnji) i da svi relevantni geoloski dokazi upucuju na to. Bi li i to prenijeli bez ograde ili negdje mora biti granica?

#8: (Podaci o autoru dostupni clanovima CONNECT-a) 2006-11-25 12:07:23 Najava je najava, a ne na¹e mi¹ljenje. Mislim da bi bilo nekorektno sa na¹e strane da se tekst neèije najave proèi¹æuje i prilagoðava na¹im stajali¹tima samo zato ¹to mi mislimo drugaèije ili zato ¹to je tema kontroverzna u znanstvenim krugovima.    Moje je stajali¹te de se protiv kreacionizma ne bi trebalo boriti zata¹kavanjem. Tome slu¾i edukacija i to ne samo na takav naèin da se uvijek izla¾e to za ¹to mislimo da je ispravno, veæ da se sagledaju i drugi aspekti, te da ih se konfrontira u raspravi. Da se u ¹koli ponekad govori o kontroverznim temama i zatim pojasni za¹to su krive mislim da bi imali puno manjih problema i ne bi morali uvoditi niz "vatrogasnih" mjera kako se to sada radi vani. Èak se i na vjeronauku razmatraju nauci drugih religija koje su u direktnoj konfrontaciji - nije mi jasno za¹to se to ne bi moglo raditi i u prirodoslovlju.

#9: (Podaci o autoru dostupni clanovima CONNECT-a) 2006-11-25 15:41:42 Pa nitko kreacionizam ne zataskava, samo ja mislim da bilo koje pseudoznanstveno iskrivljavanje cinjenica treba nazivati pravim imenom i tako nastupati. I ne znam da je tema evolucije kontroverzna u znanstvenim krugovima, bar ne kao cjelina. A i usporedba s vjeronaukom ne stoji. U vrijeme kad sam ja isao na vjeronauk ne sjecam se bas poduka o drugim religijama, ali i ako je to danas slucaj, sigurno se ne odvija bez ograde i objasnjenja. Da ne spominjem da znanost i pseudoznanost nisu konfrontirane religije, u tome je bitna razlika. No, ako vi smatrate da je vas nacin predstavljanja ok, onda nemam tu sto vise dodati.