Creationistische theorie ën waaien ove r naar Europa, aldus de commissie ... „Scheppingsleer niet in onderwijs”

[Henk op xp]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Te laat,


  Girl takes ring ban to court


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZhr6MJLtrE

;)

Henk Elegeert




Henk op xp schreef:
> REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl
>
> Henk op xp schreef:
>> REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl
>>
>> ....
>>
>> Het is de betutteling ten top !! Mag hopen dat het verder geen beleid 
>> wordt. 
>
> Ha, gelukkig, ik sta niet alleen. ;)
>
> http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc07/EDOC11297.htm 
>
> "
>
> *Doc. 11297
> *8 June 2007
>
> *The dangers of creationism in education*
>
> Report
> Committee on Culture, Science and Education
> Rapporteur: Mr Guy LENGAGNE, France, Socialist Group
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> /Summary/
>
> The theory of evolution is being attacked by religious fundamentalists 
> who call for creationist theories to be taught in European schools 
> alongside or even in place of it. From a scientific view point there 
> is absolutely no doubt that evolution is a central theory for our 
> understanding of the Universe and of life on Earth.
>
> Creationism in any of its forms, such as “intelligent design”, is not 
> based on facts, does not use any scientific reasoning and its contents 
> are pathetically inadequate for science classes.
>
> The Assembly calls on education authorities in member States to 
> promote scientific knowledge and the teaching of evolution and to 
> oppose firmly any attempts at teaching creationism as a scientific 
> discipline.
>
> *A.       Draft resolution*
>
> 1.       The Parliamentary Assembly is worried about the possible 
> ill-effects of the spread of creationist theories within our education 
> systems and about the consequences for our democracies. If we are not 
> careful, creationism could become a threat to human rights, which are 
> a key concern of the Council of Europe.
>
> 2.       Creationism, born of the denial of the evolution of species 
> through natural selection, was for a long time an almost exclusively 
> American phenomenon. Today creationist theories are tending to find 
> their way into Europe and their spread is affecting quite a few 
> Council of Europe member states.
>
> 3.       The prime target of present-day creationists, most of whom 
> are Christian or Muslim, is education. Creationists are bent on 
> ensuring that their theories are included in the school science 
> syllabus. Creationism cannot, however, lay claim to being a scientific 
> discipline.
>
> 4.       Creationists question the scientific character of certain 
> items of knowledge and argue that the theory of evolution is only one 
> interpretation among others. They accuse scientists of not providing 
> enough evidence to establish the theory of evolution as scientifically 
> valid. On the contrary, they defend their own statements as 
> scientific. None of this stands up to objective analysis.
>
> 5.       We are witnessing a growth of modes of thought which, the 
> better to impose religious dogma, are attacking the very core of the 
> knowledge that we have patiently built up on nature, evolution, our 
> origins and our place in the universe.
>
> 6.       There is a real risk of a serious confusion being introduced 
> into our children’s minds between what has to do with convictions, 
> beliefs and ideals and what has to do with science, and of the advent 
> of an “all things are equal” attitude, which may seem appealing and 
> tolerant but is actually disastrous.
>
> 7.       Creationism has many contradictory aspects. The “intelligent 
> design” theory, which is the latest, more refined version of 
> creationism, does not deny a certain degree of evolution but claims 
> that this is the work of a superior intelligence and not natural 
> selection. Though more subtle in its presentation, the doctrine of 
> intelligent design is no less dangerous.
>
> 8.       The Assembly has constantly insisted that science is of 
> fundamental importance. Science has made possible considerable 
> improvements in living and working conditions and is a not 
> insignificant factor in economic, technological and social 
> development. The theory of evolution has nothing to do with divine 
> revelation but is built on facts.
>
> 9.       Creationism claims to be based on scientific rigour. In 
> actual fact the methods employed by creationists are of three types: 
> purely dogmatic assertions; distorted use of scientific quotations, 
> sometimes illustrated with magnificent photographs; and backing from 
> well-known scientists, most of whom are not biologists. By these means 
> creationists seek to appeal to non-specialists and sow doubt and 
> confusion in their minds.
>
> 10.       Evolution is not simply a matter of the evolution of humans 
> and of populations. Denying it could have serious consequences for the 
> development of our societies. Advances in medical research with the 
> aim of effectively combating infectious diseases such as AIDS are 
> impossible if every principle of evolution is denied. One cannot be 
> fully aware of the risks involved in the significant decline in 
> biodiversity and climate change if the mechanisms of evolution are not 
> understood.
>
> 11.       Our modern world is based on a long history, of which the 
> development of science and technology forms an important part. 
> However, the scientific approach is still not well understood and this 
> is liable to encourage the development of all manner of fundamentalism 
> and extremism, synonymous with attacks of utmost virulence on human 
> rights. The total rejection of science is definitely one of the most 
> serious threats to human rights and civic rights.
>
> 12.       The war on the theory of evolution and on its proponents 
> most often originates in forms of religious extremism which are 
> closely allied to extreme right-wing political movements. The 
> creationist movements possess real political power. The fact of the 
> matter, and this has been exposed on several occasions, is that the 
> advocates of strict creationism are out to replace democracy by 
> theocracy.
>
> 13.       All leading representatives of the main monotheistic 
> religions have adopted a much more moderate attitude. Pope Benedict 
> XVI, for example, as his predecessor Pope John-Paul II, today praises 
> the role of the sciences in the evolution of humanity and recognises 
> that the theory of evolution is “more than a hypothesis”.
>
> 14.       The teaching of all phenomena concerning evolution as a 
> fundamental scientific theory is therefore crucial to the future of 
> our societies and our democracies. For that reason it must occupy a 
> central position in the curriculum, and especially in the science 
> syllabus. Evolution is present everywhere, from medical 
> overprescription of antibiotics that encourages the emergence of 
> resistant bacteria to agricultural overuse of pesticides that causes 
> insect mutations on which pesticides no longer have any effect.
>
> 15.       The Council of Europe has highlighted the importance of 
> teaching about culture and religion. In the name of freedom of 
> expression and individual belief, creationist theories, as any other 
> theological position, could possibly be presented as an addition to 
> cultural and religious education, but they cannot claim scientific 
> respectability.
>
> 16.       Science provides irreplaceable training in intellectual 
> rigour. It seeks not to explain “why things are” but to understand how 
> they work.
>
> 17.       Investigation of the creationists’ growing influence shows 
> that the arguments between creationism and evolution go well beyond 
> intellectual debate. If we are not careful, the values that are the 
> very essence of the Council of Europe will be under direct threat from 
> creationist fundamentalists. It is part of the role of the Council’s 
> parliamentarians to react before it is too late.
>
> 18.       The Parliamentary Assembly therefore urges the member 
> states, and especially their education authorities, to:
>
>    18.1.       defend and promote scientific knowledge;
>
>    18.2.       strengthen the teaching of the foundations of science,
>    its history, its epistemology and its methods alongside the teaching
>    of objective scientific knowledge;
>
>    18.3.       make science more comprehensible, more attractive and
>    closer to the realities of the contemporary world;
>
>    18.4.       firmly oppose the teaching of creationism as a
>    scientific discipline on an equal footing with the theory of
>    evolution by natural selection and in general resist presentation of
>    creationist theories in any discipline other than religion;
>
>    18.5.       promote the teaching of evolution by natural selection
>    as a fundamental scientific theory in the school curriculum.
>
> 19.       The Assembly welcomes the fact that, in June 2006, 27 
> Academies of Science of Council of Europe member states signed a 
> declaration on the teaching of evolution and calls on academies of 
> science that have not yet done so to sign the declaration.
>
> *B.       Explanatory memorandum by Mr Guy Lengagne, rapporteur*
>
> 1.Mr McIntosh and eighteen of our colleagues have signed a motion for 
> a recommendation entitled “The dangers of creationism in education”. 
> In order to examine the merits of this recommendation, the Assembly 
> decided to ask the Culture Committee to produce a report on this 
> important and difficult issue.
>
> 2.As creationism is first of all a reaction to the theory of 
> evolution, it appeared important to describe this theory. Moreover, 
> the most orthodox form of creationism denies the scientific character 
> of the theory of evolution while claiming to be a science itself. This 
> question cannot be considered without employing some basic definitions.
>
> 3.This compelled the rapporteur to discuss in the first part of his 
> report a number of technical matters. These may seem somewhat dry in 
> nature but without taking a brief look at the biological questions 
> involved it is not possible seriously to show that evolution is a real 
> science and that creationism, which falls under religion, cannot lay 
> claim to the status of science – and therefore cannot be taught as such.
>
> .....
> "
>
> **********
> Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst 
> (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
> Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het 
> tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
> Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het 
> tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
> Het on-line archief is te vinden op: 
> http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
> **********
>

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********