When societal resistance to the science behind evolution comes up for discussion, it's often an occasion for European readers to ask (with varying degrees of politeness) whether the US has lost its collective marbles. Any sense of superiority they derive from viewing the rejection of science as an American phenomenon, however, should have evaporated in recent years as creationist efforts have popped up throughout Europe, including within several governments. The situation has now reached the point where European governments have felt compelled to address the issue.

Ars has covered the recent attempts to promote Intelligent Design creationism in UK schools, but the draft version of a resolution being considered by the Council of Europe provides a far more extensive list of creationist agitation in Europe. Some of these efforts have been made by private groups, including a Turkish Muslim organization that translated one of their anti-evolution tracts into French and then distributed it to schools in Belgium, France, Spain, and Switzerland.

But other anti-science efforts have come from within European governments themselves. Although actions by the Polish deputy minister of education have attracted the most attention, other government officials have attempted to enact anti-evolution policies. These include the Dutch minister of education, who suggested that classrooms host a formal debate between evolution and creationism, and the equivalent ministers in Italy and Serbia, who simply attempted to abolish the teaching of evolution.

These efforts to dilute science education have now prompted a backlash. In the UK, a group calling itself Science, Just Science took advantage of the government's new "E-Petition" initiative to submit one that requests the government "prevent the use of creationist and other pseudo-scientific propaganda in government-funded schools." The Prime Minister's office has responded to the petition, saying, "The Government is clear that creationism and intelligent design are not part of the science National Curriculum programmes of study and should not be taught as science." The response indicates that the office will be publishing detailed guidance in the future but in the meantime says that teachers faced with questions regarding creationism should answer them within a scientific framework.

In the rest of Europe, the topic has been taken up by the Council of Europe. This organization has a broader membership than the European Union, and its resolutions are non-binding. But it has had significant influences on policy; its European Convention on Human Rights has served as the foundation for the European Court of Human Rights, which produces binding decisions. The Council's Committee on Culture, Science and Education has taken up the question of creationism and science education, and produced a draft resolution entitled "The Dangers of Creationism in Education" for the full council's consideration.

As implied by the title, the resolution does not use diplomatic phrasing, declaring that "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." It notes that there are some clear differences between science and non-science and hammers traditional creationism for promoting an "'all things are equal' attitude, which may seem appealing and tolerant but is actually disastrous." The draft also emphasizes that more recent formulations of creationism, such as ID, are equally lacking, scientifically: "The intelligent design theory annihilates any research process. It identifies difficulties and immediately jumps to the conclusion that the only way to resolve them is to resort to an intelligent cause without looking for other explanations."

The draft resolution was sent to the full council in a nearly-unanimous vote. Unfortunately, the council voted to send it back to committee. Reading the floor debate, it appears that the resolution's return was prompted by a Belgian representative, who called the resolution "unbalanced." Attempts to get him to clarify his problems with the resolution were blocked when the vote on returning it to the committee passed without debate. It's unclear whether the resolution will ever re-emerge.

The strong responses by European government agencies demonstrate that, when it comes to issues with evolution, there are some key differences between the climate there and in the US. Still, the fact that creationism has become such an issue in Europe reveals how resistance to evolution is now an international phenomenon. Groups that are uncomfortable with science can be found in nearly any country, but the advent of modern communications technology have given them a huge boost by providing those in Europe with access to rich sources of material and tactical expertise in the US and the Islamic world. These trends may keep the creationist movement active in Europe no matter what the local and regional governments do.