by Salman Hameed

Earlier today, the Pew Forum has released a survey of Muslims in 39 countries. The report is titled The World's Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society and provides a fascinating look into the complex ways Muslims are negotiating the modern world (thanks to Neha Sahgal!). In the past couple of years I have written several posts that have utilized the Pew data about Muslims. You should check out
Pew Study: Mapping the Global Muslim Population
Importance of religion for Muslims and their religious practice
Pew global religious landscape: Young Muslims and the unaffiliated
How the Muslim world sees American science and the drones
Pew Survey: Mahdi, Jesus, devotional dancing and sorcery

What does the new report says? Well, a lot of focus will be on opinions on sharia, opinions on women's rights, and extremism etc. I will also have later posts on that. But let me focus here on the question on human evolution. In 22 countries, Muslims were asked if they think that humans and other living things have a) Always existed in present form, or b) Evolved over time.

Here are the results:

Several things to comment here.
1) Interestingly, most Muslims around the world (median 53%) agree with the statement that humans and other living things have evolved over time. There is a large variation amongst countries, with Muslims in Kazakhstan (79%) and Lebanon (78%) having the highest levels of evolution acceptance and Iraq (27%) and Afghanistan (26%) having the lowest rates.

2) In 13 of 22 countries, more than half of respondents accept human evolution. On the other hand, in only four countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and Indonesia) do more than half of the respondents reject human evolution (for good measure, we can throw in Turkey in this as well, with 49%). 

3) Pakistan has the most undecided population, with 30% accepting human evolution, 38% rejecting it, and 32% undecided.

4) There are some fascinating variations within the same geographical regions. For example, Morocco has a higher human evolution acceptance rate (63%) than Tunisia (45%); Iraq's acceptance is low (26%) compared to Jordan (52%), Palestinian territories (67%), and Lebanon (78%). And Bangladesh has a higher acceptance rate (54%) compared to Pakistan's at 30%. On the flip side, Malaysia (37%) and Indonesia (39%) are almost identical - something that we have also found in these two countries in  our oral interviews of Muslim physicians and medical students. 

What is causing these differences? Well, we can look at some other indicators to make some sense of it. The Pew survey also included a question about science and religion. In particular, if Muslims see a conflict between science and religion. Here are the results: 

It seems that most Muslims do not see a conflict between science and religion. This is not surprising as there exists a strong narrative of science and Islam harmony since the late 19th century. So does the variation in science and religion attitudes explain the variations in evolution acceptance rates within the same geographical region? Well, it may possibly work for the case of Tunisia and Morocco (42% of Tunisians think there is conflict between science and religion, compared with only 18% of Moroccans) if one believes that the conflict idea leads to a greater rejection of evolution. But then the opposite is true for the case of Bangladesh and Pakistan, where more Bangladeshis see a conflict between science and religion, but also have a higher level of acceptance of human evolution compared to Pakistan.

And if you are looking for even more variety, you can look at southeast asia, where less than a third of respondents in Thailand (26%), Indonesia (26%), and Malaysia (30%) see a conflict between religion and science, but more than half of Muslims in Thailand (55%) accept human evolution, compared to Indonesia (39%) and Malaysia (37%). Similarly, only a handful of respondents in Jordan, Iraq, and the Palestinian territories see a conflict between science and religion, but only 26% of Iraqis accept human evolution, compared to 52% and 67% of Muslims in Jordan and the Palestinian territories, respectively. 

So what is the grand lesson from all this? Well, it seems that not only is there diversity in human evolution responses of Muslims around the world, but there is also diversity in evolution acceptance and its relation with science and religion perceptions.

5) It seems like the global median acceptance for Muslims is higher than that of Muslims in the US:

On first glance, it may seem that Muslims in the US are being impacted by the American flavor of creationism. Well, may be. There a number of Muslim countries with acceptance rates similar to the US - and may simply be due to some other internal factors. But this is an interesting question and we definitely intend to look into it a bit more. By the way, here is the distribution of evolution acceptance in the US based on religion: 

6) This is probably just a coincidence, but the lowest levels of evolution acceptance is found in Afghanistan (26%), Iraq (27%), and Pakistan (30%). Hmm. Interesting. These are the three countries with substantial recent US military intervention. 

7) Religious observance is correlated only with countries in Southern-eastern Europe: 

In countries surveyed in Southern and Eastern Europe, more religiously observant Muslims are less likely to believe in evolution. In Russia, for example, 41% of Muslims who pray several times a day believe in evolution, compared with 66% of those who pray less frequently. Significant gaps also appear between more and less devout Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina (-19 percentage points) and Kosovo (-14). Views on evolution do not differ significantly by religious commitment in the other regions surveyed.

Again, this is something that needs to be further investigated. But it is possible that the issue of evolution may have become inter-twined with the religious identity of Muslims in souther-eastern Europe. But it is important to note that acceptance or rejection of evolution is not correlated with religious observance in much of the Muslim world.

Fascinating!

I will post more from the Pew report in the coming days. In the mean time, you can find the full report here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

The organization of Turkish creationist, Harun Yahya, is apt at creating controversies in Europe. Be it ads on buses, anti-evolution lectures on campuses, or the mailing of an 800 page creationist tome to public schools in France, Switzerland, etc. The reaction in the media is also predictable: Muslims in Europe are considered backwards and a problem for the broader education system, and Harun Yahya is labeled as the leading proponent of Islamic creationism. This is a win-win situation for Harun Yahya and for those who want to paint Muslims as a problem for Europe as both validate each other's extreme viewpoints.

Now we have Hamza Tzortzis - and his organization Islamic Education and Research Academy (iERA). The purpose of the organization is proselytization. Up until a few months ago, I had not even heard of Tzortzis. But then first I heard of the controversy surrounding his "debate" with Pervez Hoodbhoy in Lahore, where Pervez walked out when Tzortzis started accusing Pervez of "hating the Muslim world" (you can watch the YouTube of the whole event here. You will notice that there is not much dialogue, as Tzorzis' goal is simply to incite and provoke. Pervez walks out towards end after Tzortzis' incendiary comment. You can find the incident at around 1:47:30 and after).

Then last month iERA made it in the news big time. At UCL Hamza Tzortzis debated Lawrence Krauss on the topic of "Islam or Atheism: Which makes more sense"? As you can guess from the title, propelled the event into newspapers. The organizers (iERA had rented the room at UCL) decided to have the event gender segregated (or at least divide it in three groups: men, women, and coed) - and that propelled Krauss to initially walkout from the event and Richard Dawkins to weigh in, "Isn't it really about time we decent, nice, liberal people stopped being so pusillanimously terrified of being thought 'Islamophobic' and stood up for decent, nice, liberal values?", and called the segregation as "sexual apartheid".  Now, I'm not a fan of gender segregation either, but this is going a bit too far (there is a series of recent articles on the Islamophobia of the New Atheists, and I will be posting on it in the next day or so. In the mean time, you can read Glenn Greenwald's article here: Sam Harris, the New Atheists, and anti-Muslim animus). The UCL ended up banning iERA from hosting events on campus because of their forced gender segregation policies.
the point of these debates is to rile up the base on both sides. But then, a controversy

But now University of Leicester is also investigating an event for gender segregation. The rest of the story is a bit murky for me. The event happened on February 20th (though some reports say that this was related to an event in March) but has been brought to attention by an article in the Guardian just yesterday. It is now covered all over the internet. This is what the article said:

The University of Leicester has launched an investigation into gender segregation at a public lecture held by its student Islamic society. 

The talk, entitled Does God Exist?, featured a guest speaker Hamza Tzortzis as part of an Islamic Awareness week. Seating at the event was segregated, with different entrances into the lecture theatre for men and women. 

It follows news that a London university, UCL, has banned an Islamic organisation from campus after concluding that it attempted to impose segregation at a debate which also featured Tzortzis. 

In Leicester, more than 100 students attended the segregated event, which took place last month. A photograph passed to the Guardian shows signs put up in a university building, directing the segregation. 

A message on the group's website says: "In all our events, [the society] operate a strict policy of segregated seating between males and females." The statement was removed after the Guardian contacted the society. 

A spokesman for Leicester said: "The University of Leicester does not permit enforced segregation at public events. The university will investigate whether entrances to the hall for this event were segregated by the society and will ensure there is no recurrence of this.
"The University will not interfere with people's right to choose where to sit. If some people choose to sit in a segregated manner because of their religious convictions then they are free to do so. By the same token, if people attending do not wish to sit in a segregated manner, they are free to do so." 

He added: "To our knowledge, no-one was forced to sit in any particular seat. If there is evidence of enforced segregation, that would be a matter the university and students' union would investigate." 

But a Leicester student told the Guardian he believed segregation was common practice at the society's events to avoid offending those with strong religious beliefs.

So reading all this, there a couple of things that come to my mind. Just from this news item, we don't even know if the event violated the university policy or not. But it has already become a big news and commentaries have already implicated Islam - and not even just some Muslims (here is Jerry Coyne's post on this: "Okay, Peter Hitchens, Glenn Greenwald, et al.: do you really think that Islam is no more pernicious than other faiths?"). Some of it reminds me of the way the rejection of evolution by some Muslims (and even that was an anecdotal side-remark by biologist, Steve Jones) became a major story (see an earlier post on this here). But on the flip side, I can also see a group like iERA imposing gender segregation at their events. This matter can serve as a clear boundary against the dominant culture. When the media and the blogs conflate this position with Islam's, the iERA cam then become a default spokesperson. The cycle is then complete. In many ways, this is how Harun Yahya came to represent the Islamic position on evolution - at least in media coverage in Europe.

But I hope that the voices that that drive these debates are those that are between the likes of Hamza Tzortzis and the New Atheists.

Read More »

Hosftra University anthropologist, Daniel Martin Varisco, runs a fantastic (and often quite entertaining) blog called Tabsir. It deals with cultural issues on Islam and the Middle East. Daniel has also written on our favorite Islamic creationist, Harun Yahya. Here is his latest post on Tabsir - and is reproduced here with his permission.

Harun's Houris
by Daniel Martin Varisco

Harun Yahya, a.k.a Adnan Oktar

But what greater temptation than to appear a missionary, a prophet, an ambassador from heaven? Who would not encounter many dangers and difficulties, in order to attain so sublime a character? Or if, by the help of vanity and a heated imagination, a man has first made a convert of himself, and entered seriously into the delusion; who ever scruples to make use of pious frauds, in support of so holy and meritorious a cause?
David Hume, “Of Miracles” (1748)

David Hume, the eminent 18th century philosopher, was probably not thinking about Islam when he wrote his seminal essay “Of Miracles,” but his description resonates well with the media realm of the would-be Mahdi Harun Yahya (alias of Adnan Oktar). Put enough money and media-savvy glitz behind a delusion and the gullible will come to the trough. All you need to do is check out the main website of Harun Yahya to see a sexed-up Disney version of Islam. And even if you happen to be Igbo (yes Igbo), you can read what the Harun Yahya machine has to say about the “Koran.”
The checkered history of Adnan Oktar is hardly a secret, especially in Turkey. But his cyber-reach is massive, with multiple websites available in many different languages. If you have time to spare, spend a few minutes perusing some of his 160 websites devoted to attacking evolution, proving miracles, calling for an Islamic Union led by Turkey, the coming of the Mahdi, hell, atheism and beyond. Oktar recently made news by interviewing Israeli guests, despite earlier writings which include holocaust denial.
The latest twist in the televised adoration of Adnan Oktar might best be labeled “Harun’s houris.” His television show, which at first might be confused for a Turkish “Daily Show” (or perhaps more like “Saturday Night Live”), is libido laden. The would-be mahdi is mad about gorgeous Turkish women with big bosoms, as can be seen in the image below and everywhere on his A9 network shows.

Forget about hijab and niqab, at least for the foreign audience; the women who sit as sexy backdrops to charisma personified (at least in his own eyes) are a delight for the here-and-now, not waiting in paradise. They are beauty icons, who have little or nothing to say, apart from reading script by the ghost writers who create everything attributed to Harun. At times, with the translation running below, the words are an incredible disconnect from the image. Harun preaches an Islam of love, tolerance and devotion, but he seems to focus on the first of these in his televised essence. One wonders if he also gets any payback for advertising high fashion.

Yet Mahdi Yahya himself suggests that such sexy images come from none other than Satan:
“Satan knows very well that sentimentality is a sickness that prevents people from thinking properly, of recognising reality, of being mindful of God, and of contemplating the purpose of creation and the afterlife, and that it lures people away from practising their religion, and leads them ultimately into idolatry. Therefore, he seeks to mislead society at every turn by means of an intense and constant bombardment of sentimental themes.”

Idolatry is a no-no for Muslims, but playing the same game plan as “American Idol” is all a go-go for Harun and his houris.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I have an article in today's Guardian on the Islam and evolution debate in London last Saturday. Here is an excerpt (and you can also read a longer post on it here):

An imam of an east London mosque, Usama Hasan, received a death threat for arguing in support of human evolution two years ago. On Saturday, London played host to a riveting intrafaith dialogue on Islam's stance on the theory of evolution. The east London imam was one of the speakers – but this time there were others who shared his viewpoint. 

The event, organised by the Deen Institute, was titled Have Muslims Misunderstood Evolution? The speakers included an evolutionary biologist, a biological anthropologist, two theologians and a bona fide creationist. 

It lasted seven hours, yet almost everyone stayed till the end. There were more than 850 people in the audience and even though the topic was sensitive and controversial, there was no heckling or disruption. At least from my limited interactions, it seemed that the audience was comprised mostly of young professionals. Most had no strong opinion, but their interest was evident as they were willing to spend their entire Saturday hearing about Muslim positions on evolution. 

They were not disappointed. 

And here is the concluding paragraph:

Babuna aside, this was a serious debate on an important topic. The rejection of evolution in the face of scientific consensus stands as a Galileo moment for Islam. However, the tone of the debate and the quality of intellectual exchange at the London event is encouraging and it shows modern Muslims have the maturity to address a perceived challenge from a scientific idea.  

Read the full article here.

Also, see another article on the conference by Yasmin Khan - also in the Guardian: Muslims Engage in Quest to Understand Evolution:

More than 850 delegates flocked to a seminal conference in London on Saturday about the compatibility of modern evolutionary theory and Islamic theology – despite scaremongering and the refusal of Islamic student societies to participate. Determined organisers had overcome pressure to cancel by changing the venue from Imperial College to Logan Hall at the University of London. The event was the brainchild of the Deen Institute, which runs courses to promote critical thinking among Muslim students and kindle rational dialogue within Islam. The need for dialogue is urgent, because to date there has been little open discussion within British Muslim communities on this divisive subject. Recent debates in the US suggest that evolution is not as much of a problem theologically to Muslims as it is to Christian creationists, but there is work to be done to clarify the situation.

Read the full article here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I'm now back in US and I'm glad that I had a chance to attend the London debate, Have Muslims Misunderstood Evolution? It was organized by The Deen Institute and I posted some quick thoughts on Saturday.

You can find a good summary of each speaker's presentation at Farrukh's blog.

Here are a few reasons why I think the London debate on evolution and Islam may turn out be a game-changer in the way Muslims look at evolutionary biology, and science, in general.

This was an intra-faith debate. There is no question that the topic was controversial. However, the conversation on evolution often gets derailed by common misconceptions and juvenile creationist ideas. The debate would have been a failure, had it been simply between biologists and those who follow Harun Yahya. There is no common ground - as Yahya's group has no understanding of science.

The reason for the success of the debate was that almost all of the speakers (with the exception of Harun Yahya acolyte, Oktar Babuna) accepted the scientific consensus on evolution. Then the question became: Can Muslims reconcile human evolution with their faith? Now this is an important question.

Here are a few take-aways from the London debate:
1. It is crucial for Muslims (and non-Muslims) to know that there are Muslim scientists out there, who not only understand evolution but have thought about its implications for their own personal faith. Both Ehab Abouheif and Fatimah Jackson talked about their own personal belief and the way they reconcile evolution, in particular, human evolution, with Islam. What is important here is that they accept mainstream evolutionary ideas - and not some fringe ideas of directional evolution or the American version of Intelligent Design (ala Irreducible Complexity of bacterium flagellum). Furthermore, they are first rate researchers who take a no nonsense approach to science, and a no nonsense approach to religion. Fatimah Jackson, a convert to islam, teared up when talking about her faith - and she emphasized that no one can question her Iman. She took the position that science tells the how - and not the why.

Both Ehab and Fatimah are spectacular role models for budding Muslim scientists. When a genetics student asked about potential experiments to test evolution, Ehab invited him to join his lab, which is doing cutting-edge research on ant evolution (he has two papers in published in the prestigious journal Science just in 2011!).

2. The theological debate between Usama Hasan and Yasir Qadhi was also interesting. The important thing to note is that both accepted the science of evolution. Usama Hasan's main position was that science is clear on human evolution as well and Islamic theology has room to incorporate it. Yasir Qadhi, on the other hand, said that he has no problem with almost all of evolution, except for human evolution. However, he made it clear that he is not speaking on the science of human evolution, but rather on human evolution from an Islamic theological perspective. He went after Usama, and I think, he was quite condescending towards him. Though to be fair, Yasir Qadhi had also come really prepared for the debate. But if you listen carefully, the difference in their positions is razor-thin.

Why do I say that? On the one hand, Yasir Qadhi insisted that theologically, Muslims cannot accept human evolution. On the other hand, he said that the "maximum we can go" from the theological perspective is to say that Allah inserted Adam in the natural order - and while we may not see any difference, it is actually a miracle. He used the example of dominos. He asserted that Adam was the last domino. Now, in his perspective, we are seeing the last domino, and that domino is specially placed by Allah. However, for non-believers, it may seem to be connected to all other dominos. This way, the miracle of Adam is preserved.

Usama and Yasir could have easily agreed on this point. However, it seemed to me that Yasir was insistent on inflating the differences between his position and Usama's. As it turns out, they both know each other from way back, and their rivalry goes beyond the topic of evolution. Overall, Usama was interested in emphasizing the lessons from history about the changing religious (including Islamic) interpretations in wake of new sciences (for example, earth-centered to sun-centered universe), whereas Yasir was focusing on a close textual reading of the text, claiming that this current interpretation is really definitive.

But notice that overall, this is a subtle debate on the theological acceptance/rejection of human evolution only. Even if one takes a conservative position, almost all of evolution is okay for both of them.

3. The audience was diverse and deeply interested in the topic. There were 800 people in a packed auditorium. The talks started at 11am and went till 6pm (with lunch and prayer breaks), and it was amazing to see that almost all of the audience stayed until the end. This is all the more amazing since most people lined up to get in the auditorium from 9am. Plus, there was no heckling or disruption. This was a very civil debate on a controversial topic. A lot of it had to do with the host, Mariam Francois-Cerrah. She was fantastic in not getting the debate out of hand, and in handling the questions.

But what struck me the most was the diversity in audience members. There were some whose religiosity was explicit (with hijabs, niqabs, beards, etc) and there were others that did not show that. In conversations, I found a film-producer, a pharmacist, a philosophy undergraduate, a chemist, a science communication professional, a hedge-fund manager, an IT professional, a medical doctor, a nurse, a genetics student, a biology postdoc, etc. Most of them were there to simply hear the debate. None of them had a strong position on evolution, one way or the other, but were interested in hearing Muslim positions on it.

It is a shame that the debate did not take place at Imperial College. I had posted a few weeks ago about the opposition to the debate by the Islamic Society there. The success and the tenor of the debate shows that the Islamic Society at Imperial College may simply be a step behind much of the community. Ultimately, it is the students at Imperial College that may have missed out on a high quality debate.

4. The debate exposed the shallowness of Harun Yahya brand of creationism. Those of us who follow Islamic creationism have known this for a while (for example, see the crude quality of his Atlas here). However, the media has often portrayed him and his group as the leading "intellectual voice" of Islamic creationism. However, they only have a few talking points: Evolution is an evil ideology, evolution is false, quoting Darwin out of context, and a constant reference to fossils. Well, Ehab Abouheif in his opening remarks did a fantastic job of neutralizing most of their arguments by showing the common misconceptions about evolution.

This would not have been enough had the debate lasted only hour. People who are not familiar with the debate would have seen two people disagreeing - and would have left undecided. However, the conversation went deeper, in particular with the introduction biological anthropology by Fatimah Jackson, and then a historical and philosophical discussion between Usama Hasan and Yasir Qadhi. The response of Oktar Babuna was - "fossils". The conversation had moved along - but Babuna had nothing new to add. And the audience figured it out. Towards the end, Oktar Babuna was serving as a comic relief. Other panelists would be talking about something substantial, and Oktar Babuna would bring up his fossils. People were rolling in their seats with laughter. I even started feeling bad for him towards the end.

The bottom line is that the Yahya position of no evolution at all (and with almost no change in the DNA) is akin to those who still believe in a universe where the Sun goes around the Earth. Yahya people have been able to gain traction by using evolution as a synonym for atheism and eugenics and by presenting evolution as an ideology pushed by non-Muslims against Islam. Their claim to present an alternative "scientific" idea, however, did not work when they were confronted by world class Muslim biologists. Furthermore, they don't offer any sophisticated theology either.

London is one of the strongholds of the Harun Yahya group amongst Muslims (much more so than most of the Muslim world). The debate may have permanently exposed their shallowness in both Islamic theology and Islam. And yes, even in the evolution debate, Oktar Babuna brought up Mahdi, and the End of Times. (see earlier post on Harun Yahya's fascination with Mahdi and if sees himself as The One).

5. Ultimately, this was a grown-up debate. This shows a maturity within Islam on dealing with a serious challenge from a scientific idea. Instead of a knee-jerk reaction, The Deen Institute managed to bring together a fantastic panel that engaged with the topic. And this can serve as a good model for other issues as well (freedom of speech, gender equity, etc.). I'm curious to the see the direction they will take after this event.

There is going to be a circus reaction as well. There will be some who will be upset by the debate. The Harun Yahya people will also go on the offensive and may try to manufacture a controversy. It will be unfortunate, if the press focused on some of the outliers.

This is a long post - but I think this was an important event.

Related posts:
A Riveting Session on Islam and Evolution in London
Opposition to Evolution and Islam Debate at Imperial College?

Here is a picture of a section of the crowd at the debate:

And here are the speakers along with couple organizers:

(from left to right: one of the organizers, Mariam Francois-Cerrah, Fatimah Jackson, Adam Deen, Yasir Qadhi, Usama Hasan, Ehab Abouheif, one of the organizers)

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I will be attending a debate on Evolution and Islam in London this week. It is being organized by Deen Institute. I had an earlier post about some of the controversy surrounding the event. You can find more information about the event here.

I am also interested in finding out more about the reaction to the debate. Sometimes stories get overblown in the media, and I'm trying to properly gauge the reaction to this debate. If you know of any Muslim students (in particular from Imperial College or UCL) who wants to chat about the event, drop me a line here or send me an email. Thanks!

Lets see how the event goes. I will have a post on the event from London.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

So here is some advice. If you don't agree with someone - however idiotic their position - don't resort to violence. There are a number of psychics operating here in western Massachusetts - and they are taking advantage of individuals - but that doesn't mean one has to go and attack their shops and stalls. So here comes the news that "leftist" students in Turkey have attacked a "fossil exhibit" at a metro station on the campus of Uludag University in Bursa (tip from Rainer Bromer):

A group of 30 students in Bursa have allegedly vandalized a fossil exhibition at Uludağ University, beating three security guards, breaking into the exhibition and damaging the fossils.  

The students recorded the attack, shouting slogans and taking photos with the damaged fossils, which they claim are fake. The exhibit has been organized by an anti-evolution group that claims the fossils on display prove that life forms have not changed over thousands of years, while others doubt the authenticity of the fossils. 

This is probably an exhibit of Harun Yahya's group - and yes, most of the stuff written by his organization is intellectual garbage. But evolution is a charged topic in Turkey and it maps onto the political landscape as well. This past May, I had a chance to witness a protest against a creationist conference in Marmara, and there was a sizable presence of cops (see pictures and my post here).

Here is Mustafa Akyol commenting on this affair: 

A very interesting attack took place the other day at Uludağ University in Bursa, a major Turkish city. A group of some 30 students broke into an exhibition, beat up three security guards, and shattered some of the objects on display. The damaged objects were none other than animal fossils, as this was a “fossil exhibition.” 

Now, before going deeper into the story let me stop here and ask what most Western readers would think when they hear about this news? My bet is that most of them would readily assume the militant students in question are “religious fundamentalists” who can’t stand to see facts about Darwinian evolution and, ultimately, science itself — the torch of reason, enlightenment and modernity.  

However, the facts in this incident were quite the opposite. The fossil exhibition was intended to promote not Darwinian evolution, but its main adversary: creationism, or the view that species have been divinely created rather than evolving gradually. And the students who attacked the exhibition were “fundamentalists” not of religion, but rather of one of its arch enemies: They were the members of the Turkish Communist Party or the “University Collectives,” a Marxist student association.

I hate to say this, but Akyol has a point here (by the way, Akyol used to be with the Harun Yahya group, then was an ID supporter, before settling in for theistic evolution: See my post - Mustafa Akyol's clarification on evolution). However, this is coming at the backdrop of student protests against the brutal crackdown by the AKP government. This doesn't excuse the actions here - but may provide the larger context of the incident. 

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I had earlier posted about a discussion over Islam's take on evolution in London on January 5th. Now The Independent is reporting that the organizers wanted to host the event at Imperial College, but that they had to change the venue because of opposition from a Muslim student group at the college:

The initial plan was to hold the event next month at Imperial College London, one of the country’s foremost universities for scientific exploration and debate, in cooperation with the local Islamic student society. But the Deen Institute said it was forced to pull out when it became clear that opposition to the event from supporters of creationism began mounting. It is now being held without input from any Muslim student society at Logan Hall, a conference centre owned by the University of London.

Couple of things here. We have to be careful in how we interpret this news item. First, we have to know what the opposition is for? Is the Muslim student group opposing this simply because it deals with evolution or if they want to avoid controversy (however, they perceive it). Second, we have to know if the majority of Muslim students at Imperial College oppose such an event. We have to be careful about a confirmation bias, i.e. it is only news when Muslim students reject evolution - and not when they accept it (and many indeed do - as we found out in our interviews from last year). Some of this has to do with the specific coverage of such items in British newspapers (for an example, see last year's case of London Times). The January 5th event is now taking place at Logan Hall, a conference center owned by University College London. The headline of The Independent, however, is more dramatic: Debate on Islam has to called off after revolt by student societies. And as per queue, this headline provides fodder for websites like Jihad Watch, which started it'd article with the following: "Intimidation and thuggery shut down academic inquiry".

By listing out these caveats I don't mean to imply that an outright hostile reaction to evolution is not possible. We saw that last year in the case of Dr. Usama Hasan - when he received veiled threats in response to his evolution talk in his mosque.

In any case, the event organized by the Deen Institute is taking place on January 5th in London (see this website for more information). It will be an interesting forum and I am planning on attending it. In the mean time, I would like to know more about the opposition of Imperial College Islamic society. If you have more information, drop me a line.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

There are two events in London next month that might be of interest to the readers here. One is a workshop titled, Islam and Science - a reasoned approach, for students and young researchers to be held from January 18th-20th. This is by invitation only and you have submit an application to get in. You can find out more information about the event here. It looks interesting and the workshop will be lead by a number of well known people in the field, including Nidhal Guessoum (you know him from Irtiqa as well), Jean Staune, Bruno Guiderdoni, Ehsan Masood and Dr. Usama Hasan:

This event will be the latest in a series of educational workshops that have previously been held in Algiers, Paris and other locations. A “reasoned approach” will be taken to Islam and Science: one that is well informed, balanced and constructive. The general themes of the workshop will be: Islam and the History & Philosophy of Science, Islam & Modern Physics/Cosmology, Islam & Modern Biology, Science & Islamic Ethics, Islam & New Paradigms of Science. The workshop will represent a unique opportunity for Muslim students and young researchers to discover the contemporary field of ‘science and religion’ through lectures by, and in-depth discussions with, internationally-recognised thinkers and experts in this field, including Prof. Nidhal Guessoum, Prof. Jean Staune, Prof. Bruno Guiderdoni, Ehsan Masood and Dr. Usama Hasan.

Also, if you are interested more specifically on the issue of Islam and evolution, then you can attend a conference on Have Muslims Misunderstood Evolution? on January 5th. This one includes a scientific and a theological session.  Dr. Usama Hasan will also be part of this, and it is fantastic that evolutionary biologist, Ehab Abouheif will also be there (he is an outstanding researcher and he also participated in the Boston Evolution and Islam event last month). However, it is unclear how much science will be in the scientific session, as one of the speakers is from the Harun Yahya group (wait - are there still people around who take Harun Yahya seriously??). Here are the details of the conference:

The Deen Institute proudly announces its first ‘Dialogue within Islam’ event. The conference titled: Have Muslims Misunderstood Evolution?, will for the first time in the UK, to witness prominent Muslims tackling the controversial topic of evolution in a public forum. 

“Dialogue within Islam” events seek to engage with challenging ideas of concern to Muslims, in a setting that allows for critical dialogue. 

Historically, Muslims have held conflicting opinions on the theory of evolution and whether science and Islamic theology share a point of convergence. In recent years, a polarised debate on the topic has left many Muslims confused as to what Islam does, or doesn’t say, about human evolution. 

The Deen Institute will therefore provide a platform to different viewpoints so that the topic might be debated and examined in an honest, respectful and tolerant environment.
The conference will elucidate the issue of human evolution from an Islamic viewpoint, in order to provide the audience with a clear understanding of the points of convergence between contemporary scientific theories and Islamic theology.

There you go. The next year is starting with a bang.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I was at the University of Leeds for a conference/workshop for the last couple of days - and did not get a chance to post much from there. Part of the blame goes to the fact that I was traveling only with an iPad, and the internet access to the rooms required an ethernet cable connection :( . Oh well...

I also had a chance to give a talk, Making Sense of the Rise of Islamic Creationism in UK, jointly hosted by the Philosophy Department and the Department of Theology and Religious Studies at the University of Leeds. The Q/A session was lively and enjoyable. Following the talk, I had some great conversations with, Sean McLaughlin, and his students from Turkey and Indonesia. This is one of those moments when you realize the importance of talks in academic departments. Sean is an anthropologist who has been working on ethnography of contemporary Muslim societies (check out his edited volume with Jocelyne Cesari: European Muslims and the Secular State; and more recently with Kim Knott: Diasporas: Concepts, Intersections, Identities). In particular, his focus is on South Asian Muslim immigrants to UK, and understanding their religious practices and the formation of their identity. His research is a fantastic compliment to our own work on understanding the reception of modern science in Muslim societies. Furthermore, a number of his students are working on understanding religious practices in various Muslim societies (including, amongst Muslims in Leeds), and I'm looking forward to these forthcoming works.

This fall, we will also be starting a regular colloquium series (once a month) at the Center for the Study of Science in Muslim Societies (SSiMS) at Hampshire College. These talks will be directed more at the faculty and students and hopefully will compliment our annual Hampshire College Lecture Series on Science and Religion. 

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

As I mentioned before, Berna Turam and I conducted our research interviews last week at one of the local medical hospitals and then by chance had an opportunity to attend a creationism conference in Istanbul. The evolution debate is a hot topic here, and a writer from a local newspaper, Taraf, talked to us and wrote a story about our experience so far. If you read Turkish and have access to the newspaper, you can find the article here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

I have been in Istanbul only for a few days, and it already has been quite eventful. The research interviews with physicans and medical students about evolution have been going well. But yesterday, we were at the epicenter of the evolution-creationism struggle in Turkey. A university youth group organized an anti-evolution conference at Marmara University (see here for a news item on this). So of course, we decided to go and attend the symposium at the Marmara University. We took a boat to cross the Bosporus - and that already makes this the most picturesque travel route to a creationist conference. Take that Tennessee!

On the way to the symposium: Here is a Bosporus seagull wondering if it was suddenly created as is -  or if it was a product of evolution over billions of years. 

We took a cab from the pier to the campus. But when we got close to the campus, our cab driver cautioned us that there is some protest going on at the entrance of the building we wanted to go to. I guessed that it must be for some political stuff. But nope - it was against the creationism symposium. The crowd was boisterous and the security guys were checking university IDs to let people in. We used our college/university business cards to get in. The scene was intense. There were cops, placards decrying the inclusion of religion in the sciences, and faculty and students against the symposium. Their main point was that if you want to talk about religion, you should do that in the mosques - but don't bring religion in the science departments. Things remained calm, but the presence of cops was intimidating for such a protest at a university. Here are some pictures of the protest:

The opening of the symposium itself got delayed for an hour. The main theme of the symposium was about scientific evidence against inter-species evolution. Here is the audience at the symposium: 

Of course, I sympathize with those wanting to keep science and religion separate and in keeping religion out of science classrooms. There is no serious dispute about the acceptance of evolution amongst biologists. But one of the main points of the organizers was to seek out space for critical expressions - and I think this is a criticism that we should consider seriously. On the other hand, the symposium talks were mostly about endorsing creationism (the whole forum was about refuting inter-species evolution (for most, evolution was limited to only within species). This is a tricky and a really difficult issue - especially within Turkey's changing political and cultural landscape. Nevertheless, I think ignoring it or organizing a competing symposium may have been a better strategy. But I do have to wonder how I would feel if the students at my college decided to host an astrology conference on campus. 

Here is a report from the Hurriyet:  Huundreds protest anti-evolution meet in Turkey.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Adnan Oktar, also known as Harun Yahya, thrives on publicity. In particular, he has been successful in gaining attention from western media on the issue of evolution (for example, see these earlier post: The Media Coverage of Harun Yahya and Yahya still desperately seeking attention). This has happened because his brand of creationism fits neatly into the evolution-creation debates in US and in Europe - and these are framed as a threat to the educational system. The problem is that Harun Yahya has been writing about every crazy thing - from the end of the world and the return of Mahdi (he thinks of himself as a pretty good candidate) to the denial of reality itself (he believes in a Matrix-style world). But only his rejection of evolution really gained any traction outside of Turkey - and he started shaping emphasizing creationism more and more in his books - culminating in his laughably amateurish The Atlas of Creation (see this earlier post: The Evolution of Harun Yahya's "Atlas of Creation").

While science education people in Turkey remain concerned about Harun Yahya's influence, my sociologist and anthropologist friends always considered him a joke, a local oddity, and really a nobody. Yes, he did harass academics with lawsuits - but then that may be more consistent with the bullying nature of his organization - whose source of money is still unknown. Well, it seems that the latter group might have been right all along. Below is Harun Yahya on a show that he regularly hosts. Is there really a reason to take him seriously? Here is our "creationist intellectual" (hat tip from Berna Turam):



I had to get some help about his profound Turkish words in the video. It seems that he keeps on repeating "Wow, look at the music. How amazing. No prejudices." And, of course, his moves are untranslatable :)

Enjoy!

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Last week, biologist Steve Jones gave an interview to the Sunday Times in which he said that some of his Muslim students (not a majority) have walked out of his biology classes when he addresses the topic of evolution. Now, this is an interesting observation based on his personal experience. However, the story took a life of its own and the blogosphere and even couple of other British newspapers were suggesting that Muslim medics are boycotting evolution classes in elite medical schools in London. Notice, how "some Muslim medics boycotting" turned into "Muslim medics boycotting". I will have a separate post on the media coverage of this and some suggestions on how to cover such evolution-related stories (in the mean time, you can read this article from earlier this year - also about another controversy involving London: Fallen Angels, Risen Apes: Covering Islam and Evolution).

Al Jazeera also weighed in today on its show The Stream. I was one of the guests along with philosopher Stephen Law from Oxford and Imam Joe Bradford from Jacksonville, Florida. We actually had a pretty good discussion and I appreciated the comments of both Stephen and Joe about what our attitude towards science and evolution should be (the only exception was in the post-show discussion, when Imam Joe was ambiguous about the possibility of human evolution). I also think that the host, Imran Garda, had done his homework and hence the level of questions was quite good. Even the selection of Twitter and Facebook comments was good, and the result, I think, was a fruitful and civil conversation.

Here is the video (by the way, the quality of Skype turned out to be quite good!):

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Two years ago I had posted some comments on Zakir Naik's rant against evolution. There is nothing new in it - and it basically rehashed creationist arguments embellished with some incredible misinformation. Here is that earlier post: Zakir Naik's Rant Against Evolution. Now somebody has actually gone through his often-incorrect statements and have done a fact-check on them. The fun part is to listen to Zakir Naik throw some made-up names at the audience. But my favorite is his declaration that homo sapiens are extinct species. But all fun aside, we have to realize that guys like Zakir Naik still hold substantial influence over audiences in the Muslim world (though not as much as they often claim). While many will still follow him no matter what, videos like this one (below) are useful in exposing some of their craziest statements. Enjoy! (tip - from the much saner Zakir: Zakir Thaver)



 [I have some minor quibbles with the corrections. For example, Newton, Boyle, etc. were lumped-in as Catholics, instead of Protestants, or something else altogether in the case of Newton. But overall these are minor issues.]


Also see:
Dr. Israr Ahmed on Evolution
Ghamidi on Islam and evolution
The evolution of Harun Yahya's "Atlas of Creation"
Zakir Naik's rant against evolution
Yusuf Estes' ignorance and hilarity combo about evolution
Maududi on evolution
"Islamtoday" on evolution

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

This is perfect timing. On the eve of the Science, Culture, and Modernity conference in Sharjah, Steve Paulson has an excellent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education: Does Islam Stand Against Science? I think the article does a great job of synthesizing different views and voices on the topic to illuminate some of the complexity associated with the topic. Both of your Irtiqa contributors are quoted in the article, along with our friend Taner Edis, who blogs at Secular Outpost, and several others who are working in this area.

If you have time, you should definitely check out this article. I'm going to post the first couple of paragraphs here, and then you can read the rest on the Chronicle website. In the mean time, I have to get some sleep as I have just arrived in Dubai:

Does Islam Stand Against Science? 

by Steve Paulson 

We may think the charged relationship between science and religion is mainly a problem for Christian fundamentalists, but modern science is also under fire in the Muslim world. Islamic creationist movements are gaining momentum, and growing numbers of Muslims now look to the Quran itself for revelations about science.

Science in Muslim societies already lags far behind the scientific achievements of the West, but what adds a fair amount of contemporary angst is that Islamic civilization was once the unrivaled center of science and philosophy. What's more, Islam's "golden age" flourished while Europe was mired in the Dark Ages.

This history raises a troubling question: What caused the decline of science in the Muslim world?

Now, a small but emerging group of scholars is taking a new look at the relationship between Islam and science. Many have personal roots in Muslim or Arab cultures. While some are observant Muslims and others are nonbelievers, they share a commitment to speak out—in books, blogs, and public lectures—in defense of science. If they have a common message, it's the conviction that there's no inherent conflict between Islam and science. 

This is a long article and you can read the full article here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Hold the presses. Media's favorite creationist, Harun Yahya, is touring Europe. He is currently in France and then he will be in Holland. Like usual, he has nothing new or useful to say. He is still peddling his pseudoscientific Atlas of Creation and preparing for the end-of-days (I'm still waiting for him to proclaim himself the Mahdi. Oh - he has come so close...).

All of this aside, we will possibly see a predictable round of Yahya cycle in his European tour: 1) He is going to declare victory over Darwinism 2) Modestly claim that is a genius 3) Provoke French and Dutch secular society 4) The French and Dutch secular societies will get provoked 4) Some of the media coverage will generalize his views and declare them to be a representational position of most Muslims 5) Since most of his ideas are idiotic, some will use this to stoke the fears of an Islamic takeover of Europe and the dawning of a dark-age 6) This controversy - which will be great for Yahya - will last for a couple of weeks 7) Yahya will claim slaying atheism in Europe and declare victory over Darwinism, 8) Modestly declare himself a genius 9) Will start looking for ways to create a new controversy so he can stay in the news 10) Yahya will plan another trip to Europe 11) Repeat the cycle again.

Read More »

This is a weekly post by Nidhal Guessoum (see his earlier posts here). Nidhal is an astrophysicist and Professor of Physics at American University of Sharjah and is the author of Islam's Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and Modern Science.

History is full of episodes and examples of people who, for having been a bit more clairvoyant, thoughtful, humanistic, or heterodox than the rest of their society paid a dear price, sometimes with their lives: Socrates, Hypatia, Ibn Rushd (Averroes), Bruno, Galileo, and many others.

But one would have thought that times have really changed, that someone refusing to lie about his conviction that Darwin’s theory of evolution is correct would not be called a heretic and be the subject of all kinds of threats. Unfortunately, that is exactly what Dr. Usama Hasan is going through these days, and not in some corner of Pakistan or Yemen – right in London, UK!

Usama Hasan is a special specimen. He presents himself as “an imam, scientist, lecturer & activist based in London, UK”; the Guardian describes him as “a senior lecturer at Middlesex University, fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society, former planetarium lecturer at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, and a part-time imam”; a longer bio can be found on the Global Experts website, where one reads that “Dr. Hasan received his PhD in Electrical Engineering at Imperial College, University of London… [an] MA (Hons.) [in] Theoretical Physics at the University of Cambridge and MSc (Distinction) [in] Mathematics at King’s College, London.” All of this is quite impressive, but what really makes Dr. Hasan a special specimen is the fact that he “successfully memorized the Koran at the age of eleven and has continued training in the traditional Islamic sciences”, particularly under the guidance of his father, a respected Muslim scholar. He has thus served as an Imam for two decades, hosted a weekly TV show on Islamic jurisprudence issues, and appeared on various British and US media outlets, particularly the famous BBC-TV show Hardtalk, speaking out against Muslim extremists, especially after 7/7 (the London subway bombings, the UK equivalent of 9/11).

All this, and Usama Hasan is only in his forties…

But then Darwin’s anniversary came (in 2009), and it brought troubles to Dr. Hasan, after he penned an article in the Guardian, titled “Knowledge regained” but more interestingly subtitled “In contrast to their forebears, modern Muslims have a childlike view of science, especially evolution. This needs to change.” (I know, these titles and subtitles are rarely chosen by the authors, the editors always find “better” ones…) In the article, Dr. Hasan was not only arguing that Muslims’ knowledge and view of the theory of evolution was woefully poor – hence the widespread opposition to it – but that the illustrious scholars of our civilization’s golden age were so far ahead of today’s Muslims in their knowledge of nature and their evolutionary conception of the living world. And that's when all hell broke loose. Google "Usama Hasan" and Evolution together and you get 3,370 pages, including Adam Deen's "Responding to Usama Hasan's Muslim apes" and ""Sheikh" Usama Hasan on Evolution". 

Now, those of us who speak or write on controversial issues or just hold unpopular views are used to the invectives and even the hatred. But in Dr. Hasan’s case, things went much worse.

First he was hit by a fatwa. As documented by Usama Hasan, “Sheikh Salih al-Sadlan of Riyadh gave a fatwa on not praying behind anyone who accepts Darwinism.  This fatwa was given at the Green Lane Mosque in Birmingham, HQ of Markazi Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith, during their annual conference 24-28 Dec 2010.” Dr. Hasan describes Sheikh al-Sadlan as “a respected Professor of Law, especially Hanbali Law”… Upon hearing about it, Dr. Hasan called the Sheikh on the phone and politely tried to explain his views to him, but to no avail…

Then he was hit by a petition for his removal from the mosque. He tried arguing back, by posting long rebuttals and excerpts from illustrious Muslim scholars’ views on Evolution and by giving, or at least trying to give, a lecture on Evolution (on the 22^nd of January 2011). The lecture was shouted out, and things have gone from bad to worse, as one person – as reported by Dr. Hasan – called for his killing.

Now, Usama Hasan, has posted a new entry on his blog (interestingly called “Unity: A website devoted to the unity of God, the unity of knowledge & the unity of the peoples of the world”), where he tries to show the extent to which he must be seen as an orthodox Muslim, since he believes that “As Allah revealed to us in the Qur’an, He created Adam, peace be upon him, the first human, from earth, or clay and water.  He created Him with His Two Hands, breathed His Spirit into him…” He also, unfortunately, starts to reduce the importance or the merits of scientific theories, stating that “people are free to accept or reject a particular scientific theory”, which I think is an inappropriate statement. He does, however, immediately add that “theologians who have no grounding in science, have no right to pronounce upon scientific subjects.  Any such fatwas about science from people ignorant of the subject matter are null and void.” These last two sentences are fully correct, and I support them without reservation.

It is very depressing – and even shocking – to me to witness such an inquisition on a learned, enlightened, and moderate man like Usama Hasan, who in other lands would have been hailed as a beautiful flower, grown and nurtured by a family of knowledge, and benefiting from all that is great in not one but two civilizations. That a man of science and faith, who devotes his time and his life to educating people, from the mosque to the planetarium and the media, would be “rewarded” as such is a great calamity of our times. I don’t know if something like this could happen nowadays in any other culture but the Muslim one. What a shame!

We all must speak up against such despicable acts and attacks. And we must continue to spread knowledge and civil discourse.

Usama, you are not alone out there, defending your knowledge, your faith, and your sincerity. I and many others, I hope, stand beside you to the extent we can – mostly with our thoughts, our words, and our prayers.

Read More »