Muslim medical students boycotting lectures on evolution… because it ‘clashes with the Koran’

Think at least twice before trusting your health to a Muslim doctor.

From the Daily Mail:

By Daily Mail Reporter

Last updated at 10:34 AM on 27th November 2011

Conflict: An increasing number of Muslim biology students are boycotting lectures on the theories of Charles DarwinismConflict: An increasing number of Muslim biology students are boycotting lectures on the theories of Charles Darwin

Muslim students, including trainee doctors on one of Britain’s leading medical courses, are walking out of lectures on evolution claiming it conflicts with creationist ideas established in the Koran.

Professors at University College London have expressed concern over the increasing number of biology students boycotting lectures on Darwinist theory, which form an important part of the syllabus, citing their religion. 

Similar to the beliefs expressed by fundamentalist Christians, Muslim opponents to Darwinism maintain that Allah created the world, mankind and all known species in a single act.

Steve Jones emeritus professor of human genetics at university college London has questioned why such students would want to study biology at all when it obviously conflicts with their beliefs. 

He told the Sunday Times: ‘I had one or two slightly frisky discussions years ago with kids who belonged to fundamentalist Christian churches, now it is Islamic overwhelmingly.

One of Muslim author Harun Yaha's articles denouncing DarwinismOne of Muslim author Harun Yaha’s articles denouncing Darwinism


Theories: Turkish creationist Yahya associates Darwinism with Nazism Theories: Turkish creationist Yahya associates Darwinism with Nazism

‘They don’t come [to lectures] or they complain about it or they send notes or emails saying they shouldn’t have to learn this stuff.

‘What they object to – and I don’t really understand it, I am not religious – they object to the idea that there is a random process out there which is not directed by God.’

Earlier this year Usama Hasan, iman of the Masjid al-Tawhid mosque in Leyton, received death threats for suggesting that Darwinism and Islam might be compatible.

Sources within the group Muslims4UK partly blame the growing popularity of creationist beliefs within Islam on Turkish author Harun Yahya who, influenced by the success of Christian creationists in America, has written several books denouncing Darwinist theory.

Yahya associates Dawinism with Nazism and his books are and videos are available at many Islamic bookshops in the UK and regularly feature on Islamic television channels.

Speakers regularly tour Britain lecturing on Yahya’s beliefs.

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins has expressed his concern at the walkoutsEvolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins has expressed his concern at the walkouts

One such lecture was given at UCL in 2008 and this year’s talks have been given in London, Manchester, Leeds, Dundee and Glasgow.

Evolutionary Biologist and former Oxford Professor Richard Dawkins has expressed his concern at the number of students, consisting almost entirely of Muslims, who do not attend or walk out of lectures.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

16 Replies to “Muslim medical students boycotting lectures on evolution… because it ‘clashes with the Koran’”

  1. Richard Dawkins has been front and center arguing with, taking threats from, and frankly, even defending Christians (more recently) in the battle with Islam and its war on science and reason. Short answer then is ‘yes’. Of course there are many anti-Christian groups which may use evolution as a weapon in their own little war but the orthodoxy of science has begun to speak out about Islam as the main threat to reason and science while Christianity clearly is not.

  2. I wonder whether they also reject the scientific fact that the male determines the offspring’s sex. If not, that would explain why so many women in Pakistan are beaten by their husbands for giving birth to mere females.

  3. EEyore wrote: but the orthodoxy of science has begun to speak out about Islam as the main threat to reason and science while Christianity clearly is not.

    Excellent comment. I’m struck with the fact that modern science takes off under a Christian aegis – not Greek, Roman, Islam, Buddhist or Hindu. Why so?

    The underlying ethos of the Christian faith, genuine humility is one of the most important requirements. It was in this spirit that scientists- Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Dalton and Einstein, who changed the very way we look at the universe and ourselves, functioned. All the above, the greatest of the great scientists, believed in the existence of God. The first four being devout Christians.

    Why should humility be so important for scientific discovery is difficult to say. Perhaps the freeing of intellectual vanity in the face of God’s creation, frees the mind from pressure, and thus allows it to see a “vision” not otherwise visible.

    A more mundane explanation can be that an atheist scientist is unable to see beyond the obvious. A scientist with faith and humility looks for an underlying ordering principle, and virtually into the spiritual domain, i.e., a spiritual quest for God himself, and then invents field theory (Newton) – a theory that is not obvious at all, as fields are not visible or measurable directly – in fact they defy imagination.

    Another reason why science flourished in Christian countries, particularly Protestant ones, is that they provided just the right balance of inviting free speculation on the mystery of the universe, and opposing such a view.

  4. If these “students” had anything approaching confidence in their silly beliefs, they’d obviously stay and argue, which would be annoying, but at least they’d show they had the courage of their convictions.
    Not attending, or refusing to listen to opinions you don’t agree with is a typical “religious” trick, and the more fanatical religion the more close minded and stupid the people become.

    The real question is why haven’t they been removed from the course, they should be learning bomb making or something peaceful like that.
    But of coarse, matching one sort of irrationality with another, that’s the one thing the authorities can be guaranteed to do, as they grovel to Islam, and every sort of irrationallity.
    Next we’ll have witch doctors being given equal time as a viable alternative and “valid theory”.
    Christ, diversity, don’t you just love it?

  5. Career madman Harun Yahya sure has some nerve to associate Darwin’s theory of Evolution to nazism… When we know that it’s his beloved islam which is nazism’s conjoined twin, due to their shared genocidal Jew-hatred, as the following hadith has proven for way over a millenium:

    Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews. (Sahih Muslim 6985)

  6. All the science is settled on this issue as well as climate change.

    We in Judeo-Christian countries discuss things, find evidence, and investigate till an answer is found or not as the case may be.

    In Muslim lands all answers to all issues are already provided in their own book of reference where science changes nothing. Peace and tolerance are in their genes.

    I just wonder what Darwin would make of this pile of old bones?

  7. Muslims being what they are–I hope they loudly proclaim their rejection of evolution, along with their views about gays, women, children, marriage, poligamy, rape, etc. We need them to shout it in the US, and keep shouting it. Will the Left notice when they are lined up for decapitation?

  8. St Bruno said: “All the science is settled on this issue as well as climate change.”

    If you mean “political science” then yes, but if you’re talking about the scientific method of observation and conclusion Darwin’s theories are becoming more unworkable after he laid them down 150 years ago. It’s Darmin’s creation myth which of lately has become more and more of a ‘silly little belief’. That Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels liked Charles Darwin’s book which applied the Materialist philosophy to nature should’ve been one clue to its political value. That people still perpetuate the fantasy that Evolutionism is a scientific fact is laughable. Chuckies 1859 book subtitle was “the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life” because he was a vehement racist who believed that some people were inferior, or not as “evolved” as others like himself. A ‘belief’ used to justify the enslavement of people as well as the extermination of others which Stalin, Hitler, Mao all used to murder 200 million people during the 20th Century. The teaching of Evolutionism to children is used specifically to help indoctrinate them in accepting the State as their god. But after noting all of this it shouldn’t be held as a requirement for a medical license since it has absolutely nothing to do with practicing medicine, does it? These days it is used as a ideological litmus test to weed out the non-believers of the Materialist Collectivists such as Judeo-Christians. I’m guessing the Muslims will be excused on this one point though. Because…

    “The interests of Muslims coincide with the interests of the socialists in the war against the crusaders.” -audiotape message of Osama bin Laden from Al Jazeera TV as translated by Reuters on 14 February 2003.

  9. 1. Darwin was illegal in the USSR. The communists felt that Darwin was too capitalist in nature. Research of Darwinism resulted in serious gulag time. The Communists invented their own faux-science based on a more acceptable to communism form of evolutionary theory based on a guy named Lysenko I believe it was. (I stand to be corrected on the name)

    It is absolutely critical that a medical doctor understands evolution as all Western medicine is based on it. Bacteria for example, evolve constantly when exposed to antibiotics and a hundred times more so when those are improperly used. One needs a thorough understanding of natural selection in order to have even a rudimentary understanding of pathogens and how to kill them. As for what they believe on their own time, then I don’t care if they think all life came from the tooth fairy. I understand that what works and what is true is not always 100% in harmony as we are living things and not computers. But when it comes to medicine, it is critical that they use science and reason which means evolution and leave the supernatural and fantastical to its proper compartment in ones life.

  10. FYI muslim “doctors” do not recite (or respect) the Hippocratic Oath. My own experience with a muslim “doctor was surreal and not in a good way.

  11. Lysenkoism was the official science of the Soviet Union from 1948 until 1965, afterwhich Evolutionism returned to the forefront of the Soviet Socialist ideology. Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao were all fervent believers in Darwins writings. All such ideologies were Sovietized before being fit for the indoctrination into the populace but for the most part, in one form or another the precepts of Evolutionism were dispensed. It is an integral component of all forms of modern Socialism.

    It is absolutely critical that a medical doctor understands that the antibiotic resistance of bacteria is not an example of evolution but merely an example of variation and mutations, as in the loss of genetic code within a bacterial kind. But you are right Eeyore in that we should understand all Western medicine is based on accepting the materialistic creation myth of Evolutionism. I do understand this unfortunate circumstance of the mass indoctrination of it into the commanding heights of western society. “Natural Selection” though has to do with “Social Darwinism” and isn’t related to genetic evolution, which has never “scientifically” been observed in nature or reproduced in the lab. I also agree that in medicine, it is critical that the scientific method is used where conclusions from observations can be verified and are reproducible. Evolutionism doesn’t meet these qualifications except in the dialectical materialistic fantastical realm. It is an ideology, and a religion where its adherents practice absolute faith in its fantastical doctrines. Hey, believe in it at your own peril, but don’t try to shove your religious beliefs, whether they be theistically or non-theistically based, down our throats. Or make it a “litmus” test to qualify in the fields of medicine. The two are unrelated and uncompatible. Try and keep your own superstitious beliefs compartmentalised from the rest of us, okey?

  12. Someone wrote in their post

    “I’m struck with the fact that modern science takes off under a Christian aegis – not Greek, Roman, Islam, Buddhist or Hindu. Why so? ”

    I don’t know about others. but the claim about Hindus are wrong and totally wrong. Hindu and science are inter-related. Science(chemical, metallurgy, medical, Yoga, astrophysics, mathematics beside others) was highly developed in ancient India.

    India missed the modern scientific revolution ( last 600 years ) because of rule by Muslims and Britishers who were primarily interested in looting the country. India started loosing its scientific edge and lagged behind.

    My points are based on facts. Please correct your point of view.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *