Concensus...

Post Reply New Topic

looks a lot like this (google ngram).

[img][800:330]http://i320.photobucket.com/albums/nn327/q4noobage/chart2.png[/img]

Thagt looks as if it could become interesting, but you need to explain.

Remembering I at least am mildly color blind and if there are more than two lines there I do NOT see them.

google ngram allows you to check the frequency of a word in googles database of books from 1500 to 2000. It's a rough indicator of how much attention ideas get in literature over the ages.

If you look at the very bottom, there is a superimposed line representing creationism and intelligent design (ngram is case sensitive, so the two visible lines are both "evolution")

Okay. I can't see it, can't expect to, but I get you.

"Creationism" and "Creation Science" are very recent concepts. A better pair for comparison would be evolution / creation - creationism and evolution are not parallel, and evolutionary theory is complicated to trace.

Also, the statistics will be skewed because of straight Darwinian versus punctuated equilibrium etc.,

Statistics of words in texts, also, is a very rough indicator of trebds in thought. You meed to eight for type ot text - textbook, journal, sci fi, magazine. Need to look at context. Statistics will count "Evolution is junk science" and "Evolution is the most important scientific concept in all history" as two instances of Evolution.

why are the same words represented more than once by different colors?

The graph was always going to be a little dodgy; GIGO.

I was just trying to show how little ID turns up in the literature (of any sort). It's a very rough indicator, but some.

Here's a different take (watch what happens prior to and after 1850, and at 1950);

[img][800:330]http://i320.photobucket.com/albums/nn327/q4noobage/chartcontentGenesis2CEvolution2Cevolution2Cgenesiscorpus0smoothing10year_start1500year_end2000.png[/img]



Case sensitivity.

Note the stretches [THAT one I can kind of see] of jumps in both - A knosking B while B knocks A drives both up.

The only surprise is the fact that both "genisis" and "evolution" had a high plateau of usage in the Elizabethan era in the first half of the 1600's before both dropped to the floor.

You would expect "evolution" to steadily climb after 1850 ( Darwin's time), and thats exactly what happened.

How hard is it to add two cases of the same word together for a graph?

Last edited by naturalplastic on 17 May 2011, 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

what causes the local min at around 1950 do you think?

All 4 lines decline from around 1920-50. I suppose tough economic times and the war may have had something to do with that

Well, except for tanking during FDR's presidency.

Also:

[img][800:341]http://www.powderhouse.com/~wdew/personal/miscellaneous/ngram_evolution_creation.jpg[/img]

So much for consensus. Best to stick to facts.

I want to play. How do you post the images?

Edit: nevermind, I figured it out, and it's too much work. Great tool, though!

Last edited by jrjones9933 on 17 May 2011, 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[img][800:330]http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l596/d_vigilans/darwinvsclaus.png[/img]

About Vigilins Graph: Why was Charles Darwin already so famous nine years before he was born?

He published the "Origin of Species" in 1859. He was born in 1809. But the blue line on the graph is already well above the floor in 1800?

Could be that it is actually referring to his uncle also named Charles Darwin (1758-1778) who also published at least one book before his untimely death. Either that or Darwin is actually Santa Claus, thus explaining his immortality and similar beard