Turkish scientists confront creationists' theory
Tensions are rising in Turkey's schools and universities as academics and scientists confront the growing influence of Islamic creationists.
"Without science, modern civilisation is impossible," says Haluk Ertan, a geneticist at Istanbul University, "and yet Turkey has become the headquarters of creationism in the Middle East." Tarkan Yavas, the public face of the Science Research Foundation (BAV), a shadowy group that has led the charge against evolutionary theory in Turkey for 15 years, boasts: "Not just the Middle East, the world."
Headed by Adnan Oktar, a university dropout turned charismatic preacher, BAV made international headlines in February when it mass-mailed its lavishly illustrated, 6kgAtlas of Creation to scientists and schools throughout western Europe. Hundreds of pages juxtapose photographs of fossils and living species, arguing the similarities disprove claims that species adapt with time. Elsewhere, belief in evolution is blamed for communism, Nazism and - under a large photograph of the World Trade Centre in flames - the 9/11 attacks.
"Hitler and Mao were Darwinists," Mr Oktar told journalists last month on a luxury boat trip arranged to answer questions about the atlas. "Darwinism is the only philosophy which values conflict."
A survey last year showed that only 25 per cent of Turks accepted evolution. In a similar survey in 2005, almost 50 per cent of science teachers said they questioned or rejected the theory. "Darwinism is dying in Turkey, thanks to us," says Mr Yavas.
That may be premature. BAV, secretive about the sources of its considerable wealth and widely accused of brainwashing its initiates, has been taken to court repeatedly in the past decade. In May, Turkey's Supreme Court opened the way for a new trial when it argued that criminal charges levelled against the group in 2005 should not have been dropped because of time constraints.
The silent war on creationism began last spring, when 700 academics took the Ministry of Education to court, calling for references to creationism in school science syllabuses since 1985 to be removed. "There are compulsory religious classes in Turkish schools as it is," says Ozgur Genc, a biologist who began organising the legal case after five schoolteachers in southern Turkey were transferred to another school for teaching evolution. The court has yet to make a decision.
Like BAV, which has organised hundreds of conferences on creationism over the past 10 years as well as a recent flurry of American-style "creation museums", opponents of creationism are taking their arguments to the Turkish people.
There have been scientific conferences in towns along the Anatolian peninsula in the past few months. One popular science magazine has devoted its last two issues to answering what it calls BAV's "charlatanry".
Nazli Somel, a former teacher writing a doctorate on Turkish creationism, says: "When the creationist movement surfaced in the early 1990s, many scientists just laughed at it. It's good to see they're taking it seriously now."
Yet, while most public figures avoid associating themselves too closely with Mr Oktar's group, more up-market versions of creationism have powerful supporters in Turkey.
The notion of intelligent design (ID), which suggests some cellular structures are too complex to have evolved naturally, is a case in point. In the United States in December 2005, a judge echoed most experts in calling it "a religious view, not a scientific theory" and blocked attempts to add it to a Pennsylvania school's syllabus.
Huseyin Celik, Turkey's Education minister, publicly supports it. "Evolutionary theory overlaps with atheism, intelligent design with belief," the former university lecturer said on Turkish television last November.
With polls showing that only 1 per cent of Turks are atheists, he added, not allowing ID into science textbooks would be tantamount to censorship.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited


Comments
Is a theory, not a fact. Say it like it is.
The intelligence/programming in life is way-more advanced than we can imagine.
In general, only 20% of humanity are atheist, the rest either believe in God or believe in some supernatural being or force. But the influence of atheists in forcing their viewpoint is massive in the media and education.
Belief in God is a human sense. There is even a bit of the human brain (the God module) dedicated to this - active in the majority and deactive in the minority.
The scientific definition of the word "theory" is different from the colloquial sense of the word. Colloquially, "theory" can mean a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation that does not have to be based on facts or make testable predictions. In science, the meaning of theory is more rigorous: a theory must be based on observed facts and make testable predictions.
"In science, a current theory is a theory that has no equally acceptable or more acceptable alternative theory, and has survived attempts at falsification. That is, there have been no observations made which contradict it to this point and, indeed, every observation ever made either supports the current theory or at least does not falsify it by contradicting it completely. A revision of the current theory, or the generation of a new theory is necessary if new observations contradict the current theory, as the current findings are in need of a new explanation (see scientific revolution or paradigm shift). However, the falsification of a theory does not falsify the facts on which the theory is based."
-Quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_
Your ignorance of language and its use in the scientific world is not surprising, but just as with Mr Yavaz as mentioned in this article, is pathetic and sad.
Scumbags like Adnan Oktar (who ran a prostitution ring and blackmail racket in the guise of a religious sect) and Yank televangelists of the same species feed on brainless wingnuts of your ilk.
This is a conflict not between religion and science, but between primitive and rigid interpretators of religious texts and the rest of humanity. Equating a belief in evolution with aetheism is one of the tactics. Just as in any other intolerent regime the choices are put in black and white "you are either for us (or for God) or against us (against God)". No room for agnostics or any of a vast range of other creeds and beliefs. Trying to live and force others to live by a rigid interpretation of any text will result in an intolerant and backward society which will rapidly go into decline. You only have to look at the influence of rigid religion across the globe to see that trying to enforce belief leads to repression, slavery and death. Witness the State religions of the Nazis and the Communists, the mass purges of the Christian middle ages, the pursecution of minorities is a terrible thing and will lead to the persecution of everyone as the religious or political elite try to strengthen their hold on society.
I find it fascinating how selective the focus is for some of these groups, they don't believe in evolution in a country that promotes GM crops, they use the internet, have atomic weapons, etc. etc. How can they believe in bits of science and not the whole? It's pretty obvious to me that the universe is extremely big and old, not created in a week etc. Even if they believed that God made everything directly, they don't seem to have a view about mankind's meddling with his creations, it would make more sense if anti-evolutionists were against GM crops, the use of electronics and atomic energy not just the teaching of evolution. They don't even seem to be against the Spencerist political theory of the free market economy which is a bastardised misread vision of evolution if ever there was one.
I don't understand why they stick to their reductionist reading of their much translated and abridged sacred texts, when their God has given them other sources of revelation, eyes, ears, hands and a mind, surely it's logical that these would be the primary sources of understanding and belief, not dusty books handed down, generation by generation in the dusty tents of a long dead middle eastern society.