This week's poll: Where should libraries file creationism books?

Via The Sensuous Curmudgeon, a clever blog about science vs. biblical creationism, we learned of an article titled, "Librarians Decide What is Reality" that was published in Library Journal, "the oldest and most respected publication covering the library field … read by over 100,000 library directors, administrators, and staff in public, academic, and special libraries."

In the librarian article, the author raises the question, should creationism books be filed under religion or science?  With humor, she recounts how creationists often view their work as scientific. Her question was raised after Congressman Paul Broun remarked that "evolution and embryology and Big Bang theory … come from the pit of hell" and "there are a lot of scientific data that I found out as a scientist that actually show that this is really a young Earth. I don't believe that the Earth is but about 9,000 years old."  She concludes,

Classification schemes impose order on reality. In a way, we decide what reality is. Librarians may follow the general consensus of educated people, but it’s still them making the call on whether something is science or religion, and the decision is clear: creationism isn’t science, even though some people might claim otherwise.

Librarians are supposedly ready to defend books against challenges, but are they ready to defend the order they’ve imposed on reality?

So in this week's poll, you're invited to pretend you're a librarian and decide what is reality by letting us know what Dewey Decimal Classification you'd file a "creationism science" book under.

Our poll will remain open until the morning of Sunday, October 21, 2012. Although our polling software records IPs to void double voting, your vote is totally anonymous. This is obviously not a scientific poll.

Comments are always welcome. Thanks in advance for voting!

If you were a librarian, what Dewey Decimal Classification would you assign to creationism books?

  • 200 - Religion (63%, 34 Votes)
  • 813 - Fiction (37%, 20 Votes)
  • 500 - Science (0%, 0 Votes)
  • Unsure (0%, 0 Votes)

Total Voters: 54

Loading ... Loading ...

admin

More Posts - Website

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1084842101 Michael Johnson

    File 13.

  • Peter

    In the garbage can.

  • http://www.houseofbetazed.com Mriana

    I said fiction because Creationism equals Yabba Dabba Do Time!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_S4W3AEZ7LPBCYGLEFGCXA6VYTQ Here4Years

    There are three possible areas: Juvenile fiction, mythology or in a box left next to the trash.

  • queequeg

    One can assume that God initiated the Big Bang with regularities that science calls "laws", and modern science stands as is: the universe is over 14 billion years old and shows a 14 billion years history of change; and the earth is over 4 billion years old and shows a 4 billion year history of change. One can assume that God initiated the first proto-cell on earth almost 4 billion years ago and modern science stands as is: there is an almost 4 billion years physical history of evolutionary change for life on earth.

    Consequently, philosophical-creationist musings have no bearing on the findings of modern science, and are currently outside the scope of modern science. Further, for those subscribing to the "finely tuned universe" theological argument, it should be pointed out that if the laws and constants of physics cannot vary by even 0.0000001% (as argued by the fine tuners), then the earth, solar system, and universe MUST be billions of years old. The laws and constants of physics dictate that if all the physical events of the past (meteor impacts, volcanism, tectonics, etc.) happened within just the past several thousand years then the earth, moon, and all solar rocky moons and planets would still be very hot.

    If these laws and constants are finely tuned and immutable, then the earth, solar system, and universe are billions of years old. If they are only several thousands of years old, then there are no immutable "laws" of the universe, and the universe is not finely tuned. Rather, these "laws" and constants varied by several orders of magnitude in the recent past.

    Take your pick, but you can't have both.

    -Birdan

  • http://www.facebook.com/JESSinSD Jess Colyer

    Ultimately, the creationism book should be filed under "Nonsensical Fiction" Or better yet, the trash can