Content uploaded by Stefaan Blancke
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Stefaan Blancke
Content may be subject to copyright.
Creationism in Europe: Facts, Gaps, and Prospects
Abstract
The purpose of our article is threefold. First, we present and discuss the extant literature on creationism in Europe (the
“facts”). Within this section, we offer a review of the literature as well as an overview of the most remarkable developments
and events recorded therein. Second, we indicate which material is missing from the literature (the “gaps”) and signal which
gaps we think should first be filled. Third, on the basis of a forthcoming international historical study, we outline the
possible factors that affect the popularity of creationism in Europe (the “prospects”). We also sketch how a sustained study
of European creationism can contribute to other research domains such as the study of cultural evolution and the relation
between science and religion.
... Some European creationist groups are now exceptionally well funded and have gained noticeable political and educational power. The twenty first century has brought numerous reports of how creationist groups and activists have now begun using that power (Coleman & Carlin 2004, Graebsch & Schiermeier 2006, Kutschera 2008, Riexinger 2008, Blancke 2010, Borczyk 2010, Blancke et al. 2013, Flipse 2012, Blancke et al. 2014. According to the Council of Europe and numerous reports from scientific institutions, science educators and commentators throughout Europe, political and educational action is considered critical (Council of Europe 2007, Kjaergaard 2008, Andersen et al. 2011, Blancke et al. 2011. ...
... It usually takes the form of an intuitive understanding of life on earth and especially humans being created by a god with a natural explanation dismissed as implausible. A recent study and a forthcoming book provide several examples from all over Europe (Blancke et al. 2013, Blancke et al. 2014. This latter kind of creationism is harder to trace and contributes to form public opinion implicitly rather than influencing it in the more direct fashion as done by the various activist groups. ...
... Varying in size in different European countries this segment constitutes a fairly large group of people. Creationist activists are already seeing a lot of potential for gaining support for their cause from this group as documented by a number of recent studies (Kjaergaard 2010, Blancke et al. 2013, Blancke et al. 2014. Similarly, this group is suitable for a targeted communication to increase public understanding of evolution. ...
What defines a topic as controversial? How does one measure its significance? Is it what commentators find controversial, what a majority of people think, or what generates the most heated debates? There is general consensus that evolution has been a controversial topic since the mid-nineteenth century. The scientific debate was settled in the 1930s with the modern synthesis bringing genetics and the theory of evolution by natural selection together within a single theoretical framework. The public debates, however, continued, mainly due to religiously motivated anti-evolution activists. The conflict narrative of science and religion with evolution versus creation has been – and still is – a particular favourite with the press. Consequently, the media is complicit in maintaining evolution as a controversial topic. This is the reality natural history museums have to deal with when communicating evolution. The question is whether it makes any difference which strategies museums take and, if so, whether it is possible to measure the difference. The authors discuss the role natural history museums have in the public discourse of evolution by looking at the different approaches in 2009 to the celebrations of the 150th anniversary of the publication of the Origin of Species and the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birth, comparing it to the media coverage of the events in the Scandinavian countries.
... Even Italy, while not ceasing to honor the evolutionary disciplines, has not escaped fundamentalist and pseudo-religious temptations (4)(5)(6). ...
... In 2006, another program review commission again took up the texts and the expressions "Darwin", "biological evolution", "human evolution" were again eliminated. Similar attempts to influence national educational policy have occurred not only in the United States, but also in Russia and in many European countries (4). ...
The article published by Prof. Antonio Neviani in 1896 offered us an interesting opportunity to discuss about the teaching of human evolution in schools today. Already at the end of the nineteenth century, Neviani complained about the fact that the teaching of the theory of evolution was not present in schools. Here, we present the thought of Neviani and we invite to reflect on the prohibition, still present in some countries, of the teaching of Darwin's theory. (www.actabiomedica.it).
... This is becoming increasingly evident in discussions of creationism outside the USA, where there is a very significant lack of comprehensive data. This, in part, is an understandable response of those within broad science, technology, engineering and mathematics studies fields to a perception of an increase in creationist discourses outside US contexts (see Blancke et al. (2013) for a good example and comprehensive overview of this concern in Europe). While I am not denying that creationist or intelligent-design narratives and groups do exist in Europe and internationally, we need to be very wary -especially when we have little empirical data -of inflating the levels of acceptance, salience or influence of such positions. ...
... While I am not denying that creationist or intelligent-design narratives and groups do exist in Europe and internationally, we need to be very wary -especially when we have little empirical data -of inflating the levels of acceptance, salience or influence of such positions. As Blancke et al. (2013) show, there have been some quite vocal incursions of advocates of creationism (or its fellow traveller, intelligent design) into policy discussions within European contexts. As is often the way in public debate or online forums, it is often those who shout the loudest who gain the most attention, but it would be folly for the academy to assume that being vocal or having access to a privileged platform means that such individuals are acting in a way that is representative of broader publics' actual perspectives. ...
... Opposition to evolution has been found in Europe, where creationism is widespread among religious populations such as in Turkey, where only 22% of the adults agreed with Darwin's theory (Blancke, Hjermitslev, Braeckman, & Kjaergaard, 2013). Such opposition has recently been found also in Britain, where Muslims and conservative Protestant Christians show low levels of evolution acceptance (Unsworth & Voas, 2018). ...
Due to the controversies surrounding the topic of evolution among religious and non-religious people alike, the treatment of biological evolution in education—both teaching and learning—is a potential minefield. The goal of this study was to probe the insights of Israeli stakeholders in education regarding the revision of the Israeli science and technology and biology curricula with respect to evolution. Our study is designed to capture the educational stakeholders’ opinions regarding the theological tensions surrounding the incorporation of evolution in the curricula, as well as methods of action to overcome or avoid these possible tensions. The study population was composed of 21 educational stakeholders, 11 of them scientists, developers of teaching and learning materials, and current or former chief supervisors at the Israeli Ministry of Education. These stakeholders were interviewed in-depth. The other 10 stakeholders were junior-high-school science or high-school biology leading teachers, for which focus groups were arranged. To obtain the main themes arising from the interviews, thematic analysis was conducted, and codes were obtained by grounded theory analysis. The results show themes of opposition to teaching evolution, a clear voice for no opposition to teaching evolution, and methods of action to overcome or avoid tension at the teacher and student levels. We suggest a culturally competent intervention program to reduce the dissonance between religion and evolution.
... Yet the theme does appear in the research material. For instance, Stefaan Blancke et al. (2013) have conducted a review, with a multifaith approach, of European creationism. On the other hand, intelligent design as a more modern version of creationism was dealt with by several authors (e.g., Täljedahl 2010; Höst and Bohlin 2015; Loikkanen 2018). ...
This article presents a review of the literature on science and religion in Nordic countries. Seventy‐seven articles, books, and chapters on the topic were collected from five major scholarly databases between 1997 and 2018. We scrutinized how research in this data set was engaged with social scientific research. Most of the research was not social scientific. It was primarily philosophical, theological, and historical research; very little presented empirical and theoretical social scientific research. The studies reflected societal discussions, bringing out some cultural dimensions and social issues, but not specifically in the Nordic context. Some societal aspects were highlighted, such as ethics and climate change, but these were not necessarily tied to the Nordic societies. We propose that in the Nordic context there seems to be a need for social scientific research on science and religion. This research could use theoretical perspectives from, for instance, sociology, science and technology studies, higher education studies, and anthropological research.
... Teaching evolution is very challenging: the biological topic is complex and everyday conceptions which are not in accordance with scientific conceptions are widely spread and can hinder a deeper understanding of science. It is not only the members of creationist movements who can hold creationists views, but everyday conceptions are also influenced by biblical explanations (Blancke, Hjermitslev, Braeckman, & Kjaergaard, 2013). In this chapter, we speak about views and conceptions in terms of concepts and explanations about the natural world that can, but do not necessarily have to, be associated with religious faith (e.g. ...
Creationist conceptions and biblical explanations can impact students’ conceptions, their perceptions of the natural world, and therefore hinder their acceptance of science and its explanations. This chapter presents two case studies that research the interplay between creationist conceptions and evolution understanding in informal learning environments. Case study one deals with the topic of the emergence of humankind in an exhibition presented to visitors in an IKEA store. This study shows that in terms of human descent, the learning environment could improve argumentation towards more scientifically accepted views, but also that the conception of ‘special creation’ could not be altered. Case study two deals with a guided tour about the evolution of life throughout geological eras in a natural history museum. The study analyses the relationship of evolution knowledge and creationist conceptions. The results show that while evolution knowledge could be improved, creationist conceptions became less prominent. Both studies are discussed in terms of implications for learning in informal (and formal) learning environments.
In 2006, the Turkish Harun Yahya Enterprise published and distributed thousands of copies of its anti‐evolutionary text Atlas of Creation to educational institutes in the West. Although this was little more than a publicity stunt, it resulted in Harun Yahya becoming a mainstay in discussions about creationism in Europe. Although Yahya is often presented as the “go to” representative of European Muslim perceptions of evolution, one would be hard pressed to find the literature about Islamic creationism in Europe that does not engage in a discussion of Harun Yahya. However, little evidence exists to support the notion that Harun Yahya warrants such extensive attention, or that Harun Yahya has a substantive influence among European Muslims. This article will explore existing claims about the popularity of Harun Yahya, before drawing on recent research into Muslim perceptions of evolution to argue that Harun Yahya is relatively unknown among Muslims, at least in the British context, and is not influential even among those who are familiar with his work.
The goal of our study was to examine a large (>400), cross-sectional sample of Chinese pre-service biology teachers (PBTs) in order to document their evolution acceptance levels, evolution knowledge, and evolutionary reasoning patterns. This approach was taken in order to better understand the degree to which particular evolutionary reasoning difficulties exist independent of religious worldviews. The sample included (1) 160 PBTs tasked with completing four items from the ACORNS instrument, (2) 320 PBTs who completed the CINS and MATE instruments, and (3) 32 teachers who completed semi-structured clinical interviews using four ACORNS items. Findings from these samples revealed that Chinese PBTs’ knowledge (CINS) and acceptance (MATE) were equivalent with teachers’ scores from other countries, whereas performance on explanation tasks was lower. Scores from the CINS, MATE, and ACORNS did not reveal any significant improvements through the four-year teacher education programme. Although a large body of work has shown the important roles that religious affiliation and religiosity can play in evolutionary understanding and acceptance, our findings demonstrate that many evolutionary reasoning difficulties extend beyond religious factors, and add to a growing body of work showing that religiosity does not adequately account for PBTs’ moderate evolution acceptance.
Are the religious suspicious of science? Drawing on data from 52 nations in the World Values Survey (wave 6) (N = 58,474), I utilize multilevel models to examine the relationship between religiosity, religious context, and five different orientations towards science: confidence in science, trust in scientific authority under conditions of conflict with religion, faith in science, views on the moral effects of science, and interest in scientific knowledge. Results show that while religiosity is on average negatively associated with the five outcomes, the relationship between religiosity and orientations towards science varies by country such that religiosity is sometimes positively associated with the different outcomes. Religiosity is only consistently negatively associated with trust in scientific authority in all countries and with all orientations towards science in western countries. Finally, differences in orientations towards science also exist across country religious contexts, with countries dominated by the unaffiliated having more positive orientations towards science.
The Netherlands is, besides the United States, one of the few countries where debates about creationism have been raging for decades. Strict creationism has become deeply rooted in traditional Reformed (Calvinist) circles, which is all the more remarkable as it stemmed from a very different culture and theological tradition. This essay analyses the historical implantation of this foreign element in Dutch soil by investigating the long-term interaction between American creationism and Dutch “neo-Calvinism,” a movement emerging in the late nineteenth century, which attempted to bring classical Calvinism into rapport with modern times. The heated debates about evolution in the interbellum period as well as in the sixties—periods characterized by a cultural reorientation of the Dutch Calvinists—turn out to have played a crucial role. In the interbellum period, leading Dutch theologians—fiercely challenged by Calvinist scientists—imported US “flood geology” in an attempt to stem the process of modernisation in the Calvinist subculture. In the sixties many Calvinists abandoned their resistance to evolutionary theory, but creationism continued to play a prominent role as the neo-Calvinist tradition was upheld by an orthodox minority, who (re-)embraced the reviving “Genesis Flood” creationism. The appropriation of American creationism was eased by the earlier Calvinist-creationist connection, but also by “inventing” a Calvinist-creationist tradition, suggesting continuity with the ideas of the founding fathers of neo-Calvinism. This article aims to contribute to a better understanding of what Ronald L. Numbers has recently called the “globalization” of the “science-and-religion dialogue.”
The question of whether religious explanations about the origin of life should be taught alongside scientific accounts in compulsory science education has sparked controversy in several countries for decades. An important site for these controversies is media reporting. This article presents the results of a quantitative and qualitative analysis of UK national and regional newspaper coverage from 2002. The sampled articles reported the controversy about teaching creationism in science classes alongside the theory of evolution at Emmanuel College, Gateshead, UK. The results describe how the national curriculum for science was represented in these articles and, in particular, how scientific controversies were initially described and revised as the public debate developed. Furthermore, the article documents the mobilization of a range of actors who used media reporting as an important channel to argue their case about this issue. It is suggested here that media reporting of creationism/evolution was an important factor in framing public debate about these issues, influencing, in part, the debate over which controversial science-based topics should be taught as part of the national curriculum for science.
There are few scientific texts that have rivalled Charles Darwin's On the origin of species (1859) for the impact they have had on the way that people understand nature and their place in it. In the context of an enduring belief in the biblical account of the ‘special creation’ of species by God, Darwin's claim that all species were related through common descent was heterodox enough, yet not entirely novel. Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus, had been an early proponent of evolutionary thought, and the anonymous publication of the Vestiges of the natural history of creation (1844) by the journalist and publisher Robert Chambers had caused much controversy with its speculative history of cosmological ‘transmutation’, in which all living things had developed from earlier, simpler forms. But what was new and arguably more significant in Darwin's work was the idea that the emergence of new and often more complex species could be explained by ‘natural selection’: by the way that environmental pressure will favour the reproduction of those individuals that possess certain characteristics, a process that over a long period of time can radically alter the characteristics of an interbreeding population. The influence of Darwin's book was clearly also enhanced by his accessible and engaging prose, and the way that it combined detailed evidence from an extraordinary range of domains with an inductive style of scientific reasoning that went well beyond a strict Baconian method; instead he deployed metaphor to grasp the similarities between the dissimilar and then sought to persuade the reader of the reality of that metaphor.
In the Muslim world Islam and modern science are often seen as compatible. It is common for people to cite verses in the Qur'an or the achievements of medieval Muslim philosophers to support this view. Furthermore, there is widespread recognition that science (usually in its applied form) is essential for progress. In fact the dominant narrative in the Muslim world sees Islam as a rational religion in harmony with modern science. At the same time many Muslims see the theory of biological evolution as a challenge to the Islamic account of creation. Thus, when a well-established scientific idea, such as biological evolution, clashes with the religious beliefs of many Muslims, we find complex reactions, ranging from selectively rejecting the relevant science to ignoring the troublesome idea, without harming the outwardly harmonious framework. It is quite possible, nonetheless, that the Muslim world will become the focal point of evolution–creation controversies in the coming years. Low educational standards in combination with widespread misinformation about evolutionary ideas make many countries in the Muslim world fertile ground for anti-evolutionary movements. In addition there already exists a growing and highly influential Islamic creationist movement, which made headlines in Europe in 2007 when French public schools received an unsolicited gift of an 850-page colour Atlas of creation, produced by a Muslim creationist from Turkey known by the name of Harun Yahya. Biological evolution, however, is still a relatively new concept for the majority of Muslims, and a serious debate over its compatibility with religion has not yet taken place.
This book explains the history and strategy of the intelligent design creationist movement, which is headquartered at the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture in Seattle, WA. The movement's twenty-year "Wedge Strategy," implementation of which began in 1998, is aimed at bringing intelligent design into American public schools, public policymaking, and the cultural mainstream. Beginning with a brief history of the movement and the authentication of the "Wedge Document," in which the Wedge Strategy is outlined, the book critiques the incompetent science and rhetorical tactics of the movement's leaders: Douglas Axe, Paul Chien, Jonathan Wells, Michael Behe, and William Dembski. The movement's own documents reveal its religious funding sources and its execution of all phases of the strategy except the production of genuine scientific data, including its development of a legal defense against challenges to the teaching of intelligent design. The book recounts the movement's political maneuvering in its effort to influence science curricula in individual states, most notably Kansas and Ohio, and to develop political support among members of Congress. Importantly, the book documents the centrality of religion to intelligent design, its leaders' associations with Christian extremists, its continuity with earlier forms of creationism, and its ambitions for academic legitimacy. This 2007 edition provides updates on the movement's efforts in Kansas and Ohio and offers a firsthand account by Barbara Forrest, who was an expert witness for the plaintiffs, of the landmark legal case involving intelligent design, Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District (2005).
Why do so many Americans reject the modern theory of evolution? Seeking answers, the author became a regular attendee at creationist conferences and other gatherings. After ten years of attending events like the giant Creation Mega-Conference in Lynchburg, Virginia, and visiting sites like the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, and after hundreds of mostly friendly conversations with creationists of varying stripes, he has emerged with a story to tell, a story that goes well beyond the usual stereotypes of Bible-thumping fanatics railing against coldly rational scientists. Through anecdotes, personal reflections, and scientific and philosophical discussion, the author presents a more down-to-earth picture of modern creationism and the people who espouse it. He also tells the story of his own nonbeliever's attempt to understand a major aspect of American religion. Forced to wrestle with his views about religion and science, the author found himself drawn into a new world of ideas previously unknown to him, arriving at a sharper understanding of the reality of science versus religion disputes, and how these debates look to those beyond the ivory tower.