Council of Europe accepts resolution opposing the teaching of creationism as a scientific discipline

| 61 Comments | 1 TrackBack

Press Release - 656(2007)

Council of Europe states must “firmly oppose” the teaching of creationism as a scientific discipline, say parliamentarians

Strasbourg, 04.10.2007 “Parliamentarians from the 47-nation Council of Europe have urged its member governments to “firmly oppose” the teaching of creationism “which denies the evolution of species through natural selection” as a scientific discipline on an equal footing with the theory of evolution.

In a resolution passed by 48 votes to 25 during its plenary session in Strasbourg, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) declared: “If we are not careful, creationism could become a threat to human rights.”

Presenting the report, Anne Brasseur (Luxembourg, ALDE), a former Education Minister, said: “It is not a matter of opposing belief and science, but it is necessary to prevent belief from opposing science.”

“The prime target of present-day creationists, most of whom are Christian or Muslim, is education,”the parliamentarians said in the resolution. “Creationists are bent on ensuring that their ideas are included in the school science syllabus. Creationism cannot, however, lay claim to being a scientific discipline.”

The parliamentarians said there was “a real risk of a serious confusion” being introduced into children’s minds between conviction or belief and science. “The theory of evolution has nothing to do with divine revelation but is built on facts.”

“Intelligent design, presented in a more subtle way, seeks to portray its approach as scientific, and therein lies the danger,” they added.

“Creationism … was for a long time an almost exclusively American phenomenon,” the parliamentarians pointed out. “Today creationist ideas are tending to find their way into Europe and their spread is affecting quite a few Council of Europe member states.”

The report cites examples from Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom.

Press Conference Video

Voting result including the amendments

Adopted Resolution

Transcripts of proceedings

1 TrackBack

New on.... from A Blog Around The Clock on October 7, 2007 9:42 PM

Chris Clarke explains eloquently what is, essentially, my blog commenting policy (though I transgress on other people's blogs...sorry). The Senate vote on the mandatory free access to NIH-funded research has been postponed, which gives you all a few mo... Read More

61 Comments

you just don’t recognize the impact your vastly unsubstantiated claims (for a vast understatement) has on the inexplicable products of some (lets face it) UNKNOWN PROCESSES producing “conscious beings”. You prefer you “philosophical preferences” in the NAME OF “SCIENCE” in order to DICTATE your preferences. This is CRIMINAL. AND YOU UNDOUBTABLY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE RECONCILIATIONS FOR IT AT SOME POINT!

Let me see how many creationist responses I can predict…

1) “The Council of Europe is turning into the Antichrist, just like Hal Lindsey and the ‘Omen’ movies predicted!”

2) “Internationalist jackbooted thugs of the New World Order are subverting national sovereignty and censoring Christian belief to further their atheist agenda!”

3) “ID and Creationism are not the same!”

4) “ID does NOT deny evolution, it just denies Darwinian evolution!”

5) “They’re making evolution a state religion!”

6) “If science is right and ID is wrong, why do they have to use state power to prop up evolution?”

7) “It’s just a theory!”

8) “We’re being persecuted!!!”

Oh, screw it, this is too easy…

I approve.

Unfortunately, I find myself wondering how long it will last once the islamist whackos start including evolution in their standard spiel…

lean:

you just don’t recognize the impact your vastly unsubstantiated claims (for a vast understatement) has on the inexplicable products of some (lets face it) UNKNOWN PROCESSES producing “conscious beings”. You prefer you “philosophical preferences” in the NAME OF “SCIENCE” in order to DICTATE your preferences. This is CRIMINAL. AND YOU UNDOUBTABLY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE RECONCILIATIONS FOR IT AT SOME POINT!

Good thing that I believe that God has a sense of humor and forgives those who shout

lean sez… you just don’t recognize the impact your vastly unsubstantiated claims (for a vast understatement) has on the inexplicable products of some (lets face it) UNKNOWN PROCESSES producing “conscious beings”. You prefer you “philosophical preferences” in the NAME OF “SCIENCE” in order to DICTATE your preferences. This is CRIMINAL. AND YOU UNDOUBTABLY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE RECONCILIATIONS FOR IT AT SOME POINT!

61 words.

Several ad hominems.

One veiled threat.

And of course, not a single verifiable fact.

Once again, true to form.

Next time, Neal, try posting as “Lane”, or maybe “Lena”; get in touch with your feminine side.

Neal spelled his name wrong. He mixed up the letters. Now we will never be able to figure out that he broke the rules yet again and deserves to be banned once and for all. If only we had a design detector like the great Dembski.

The Council of Europe is more concerned in defending darwinism than defending its own survival

http://kleinverzet.blogspot.com/200[…]n-files.html

Mats Wrote:

The Council of Europe is more concerned in defending darwinism than defending its own survival

Hooray! Mats, once again you have succeeded in finding a source that completely misprepresents the true facts of the case.

It seems to me that the Council of Europe is actually representing the majority of its constituents in issuing this statement. There is a large, but quiet, majority of people in Europe who do not wish to have their children fed creationist bovine faecal matter masquerading as science.

mats - did OJ do it?

PvM:

lean:

you just don’t recognize the impact your vastly unsubstantiated claims (for a vast understatement) has on the inexplicable products of some (lets face it) UNKNOWN PROCESSES producing “conscious beings”. You prefer you “philosophical preferences” in the NAME OF “SCIENCE” in order to DICTATE your preferences. This is CRIMINAL. AND YOU UNDOUBTABLY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE RECONCILIATIONS FOR IT AT SOME POINT!

Good thing that I believe that God has a sense of humor and forgives those who shout

…while wetting their pants.

lean: your USE of CAPSLOCK is astounDING.

…48 votes to 25…

Uh-oh - the Council of Europe couldn’t even muster a 2/3 majority against creationism? Is this really grounds for celebration?

So tell us, Mats, how the teaching of phony science helps Europe protect its freedom and culture against Islamofascist or other incursions?

You really don’t think much, do you?

Mats:

The Council of Europe is more concerned in defending darwinism than defending its own survival

http://kleinverzet.blogspot.com/200[…]n-files.html

Of course, the council is concerned about the poor science involved in creationism and ID as well as the larger societal impact of these movements.

Mats being funny:

The Council of Europe is more concerned in defending darwinism than defending its own survival.

Yes, of course. We all know that European bureaucrats have a death wish and a reckless disregard for their and others lives. LOL.

It is actually the other way around. Science is the reason why we don’t live in caves, watch half our children die before age 5, and drive cars rather than walk everywhere. No one but a few religious crackpots wants to go back to the dark ages. Substituting pseudoscience for science would be a good start on the journey to the 14th century.

Europe has two fundie problems. A few Xians and also Moslem. What is odd is that the two groups borrow the same propaganda and rhetoric from each other. They just change Jehovah to Allah and vice versa. I’ve read some Moslem extremist polemics against evolution. They rail against methodological naturalism and call Darwinism a religion just like the Xian extremists do. Not surprising, they appropiated it word for word from Xian fundie websites.

So tell us, Mats, how the teaching of phony science helps Europe protect its freedom and culture against Islamofascist or other incursions?

You really don’t think much, do you?

I’ve come to the conclusion that Mats’ claim of not being “anti-science” is a bald-faced lie.

Here’s an example of the international fundamentalist threat to science: the recently-published “Atlas of Creation.” Published in Istanbul by a company called Global Publishing, it purports to show the fallacy of the fossil record with full-color photos and quotes from the Qur’an; in a note to the reader, it says that the theory of evolution “constitutes the basis of all anti-spiritual philosophies.”

What is the Council of Europe and what statutory authority does it have? Does this resolution bind anybody to do anything, or is it simply an expression of sentiment?

PvM

Of course, the council is concerned about the poor science involved in creationism and ID as well as the larger societal impact of these movements.

If the purpose of this decision is to prevent the “bad impact” on society, then euro-darwinists would aim their guns elsewhere, since they are allowing in their soils people who have a clear anti-european mentality.

No, the purpose of this impact is not to protect the society. It has other goals, obviously.

I predict that Truthiness in science will complain about how the council of Europe is squashing legitimate scientific opposition to evolution, and that this is a horrible thing to do which will have a negative impact upon freedom of speech.

Yay! :-) :-) :-) And thanks for catching this PvM, you are on a roll today.

But they just had to rub Mats Molén’s creationist museum in my face again. :-|

Neal, Mats, back off, this is a democratic process. There isn’t any connections to what scientists specifically claim, nor is EU threatened by Mats multicultural bigotry. EU builds on a democratic multiculture.

the Council of Europe couldn’t even muster a 2/3 majority

Politics. Some nations are ruled by christ democrats, for all I know, but if not these parties can scramble up coalitions on moral issues such as education.

I wasn’t sure it would pass, and I must admit to surprise then the committee behind the draft resolution voted unanimously for it.

But note that point #14 refers to “leading representatives” of main monotheistic religions, which I believe was harshly debated as irrelevant. I assume that it was the compromise to get it pass Germany who IIRC wanted this. (Why else mention the catholic leader specially, or exclude buddhism and hinduism?)

Richard Bennett Wrote:

What is the Council of Europe and what statutory authority does it have? Does this resolution bind anybody to do anything, or is it simply an expression of sentiment?

in this case I ‘d answer no and yes.

LT:

It is actually the evangelism of Harun Yahya displayed in the massive dissemination if that book that led to the CE resolution.

Richard Bennett:

Richard Bennett Wrote:

What is the Council of Europe and what statutory authority does it have?

Oh, come on now, a Great American author of The Great American Blog should know this, or at least how to follow the link to the EC’s home:

Council of Europe Wrote:

Founded in 1949, the Council of Europe seeks to develop throughout Europe common and democratic principles based on the European Convention on Human Rights and other reference texts on the protection of individuals.

If that is confusing, Wikipedia clarifies:

Wikipedia Wrote:

The Council of Europe is the oldest organisation working for European integration. Founded in 1949, it predates the European Union.

The Council of Europe is not to be confused with the Council of the European Union or the European Council.

Wikipedia Wrote:

Cooperation between the European Union and the Council of Europe has recently been reinforced, notably on culture and education as well as on the international enforcement of justice and Human Rights.

The European Union is expected to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention). At their Warsaw Summit in 2005, the Heads of State and Government of all Council of Europe member states reiterated their desire for the EU to accede without delay to ensure consistent human rights protection across Europe.

There are also concerns about consistency in case law - the European Court of Justice (the EU’s court in Luxembourg) is treating the Convention as part of the legal system of all EU member states in order to prevent conflict between its judgements and those of the European Court of Human Rights (the court in Strasbourg interpreting the Convention). …

It is further proposed that the EU join as a member of the Council of Europe once it has attained its legal personality in the Reform Treaty, possibly in 2010. [Bold added.]

So the CE has political and legal influence on EU member states, and these two efforts tries to reconcile as much as is possible in the european setting of free nations.

Richard Bennett:

Oh, and I forgot to stress that the post described a parliamentarian organization, which clarifies the democratic process.

In other words, Torbjörn, the Council of Europe is a consultative committee that makes recommendations to the EU that lack force of law. It was simply an expression of sentiment, not a binding policy.

That’s better than nothing, but not by much.

Mats:

PvM

Of course, the council is concerned about the poor science involved in creationism and ID as well as the larger societal impact of these movements.

If the purpose of this decision is to prevent the “bad impact” on society, then euro-darwinists would aim their guns elsewhere, since they are allowing in their soils people who have a clear anti-european mentality.

No, the purpose of this impact is not to protect the society. It has other goals, obviously.

Flawed logic. First of all even if your argument is correct that they are allowing in their soils people with an anti-european mentality, it still is flawed since the two are not an either or situation. One can be concerned about the influence of creationism on one’s youth while still allowing freedom of religious expression.

As to your claim that europe allows anti-european mentality on to their soils, this is for many europeans a tradition. One does not have to swear allegiance to the European Union to be allowed as a visitor, temporary guest or even permanent guest. Europe in many ways is far more hospitable than lets say the US.

Of course, anyone familiar with the Council of Europe would realize that their work is not limited to denouncing creationism as science.

Once again, Mats is left empty handed.

So tell us Mats, you still owe us an explanation as to what the ID thesis is all about.

That would be the Christian thing to do, wouldn’t it? Or do you insist on further denying your God(s)?

Please, you in the (philosophical only)know, who have inherited the top of the pop-culturally sanctioned official position of “we have the answers!!!!!!!” regarding “existence” and “living systems” (After all if there weren’t the anti-intellectual forces having irrational influence over the majority of people who haven’t had either the opportunity, intellectual abilities, or desire to understand the issues, and see the vast deficits that are a part of the macro-evolutionary philosophy) have to at some point be justly honest about your positions!!!!! You claim to have adequate scientific demonstrable support for the vast amount of claims that are required to (in any kind of reasonable forum) support your assertions!!!!!!! Please, for the sake of the world at large, WAKE UP, and see what kind of pestilent influence your BELOVED PERSONAL PHILOSOPHICAL PREFERENCES (YOU KNOW WHY) HAS on those that “HAVEN’T A CLUE” OTHER THAN BEING INSTRUCTED BY YOU!!!!!!!!!

Torbjörn Larsson, OM:

Neal, Mats, back off, this is a democratic process. There isn’t any connections to what scientists specifically claim, nor is EU threatened by Mats multicultural bigotry. EU builds on a democratic multiculture.

Fear of foreigners seems to be yet another endearing ‘Christian’ concept I guess..

“Lean” - This is slightly off-topic, but here’s a tip you might find useful: your toenail clippings should be thrown in the garbage, not eaten. You’re welcome.

I’ve been reading through your website. You have some nice posts on here, especially this one - I really enjoyed it…nice post. Consider yourself bookmarked

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by PvM published on October 4, 2007 8:22 PM.

Little imaginary beings was the previous entry in this blog.

Digital forensic versus ID’s design inference 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