What does the internet think ... and does it matter?

Thanks to the science fiction author John Scalzi, I stumbled upon an intriguing website called "What Does the Internet Think?" The site uses some methodology (who knows what) it comes up with a rating of the percentage of positive and negative postings on a topic across the internet. I couldn't pass up the chance to see what sort of fun data I could get out of this. For now, I'll post the information with very little commentary, but may follow up in the future.

Let's start by considering some broad subjects:

Where does the internet find truth and meaning?

It's probably not at all surprising that the internet skews toward the science-loving end of the spectrum, at least at the broadest level. I'm kind of surprised at the level of negativity about religion, to be honest. 

I would like to be heartened by the overflow of positive regard for skepticism, but it occurs to me that whatever methodology they're using probably cannot sort out the context of positive or negative statements ... so if a post is saying that it supports science, but then puts forward a concept like intelligent design as being scientific, it would likely count as a pro-science posting, even though it's really contradicting and undermining scientific inquiry and findings. Similarly, someone who supports being skeptical of evolution or skeptical of global warming would probably count toward being positive toward skepticism, even if their approach to the facts is fundamentally dogmatic, authoritarian, and revisionary instead of supporting principles of skeptical inquiry.

Which leads us to the next question ...

Does the internet prefer evolution or creationism?

The thing I find most interesting about this is that while there's a lot of indifference about creationism, there's virtually no indifference about evolution. This runs counter to my own experience. I know several people who are religious but are fairly indifferent about whether or not evolution is the physical mechanism of creation. In other words, they're religious but believe that God started evolution. But I know very few people on either side of the debate that are indifferent about creationism. 

However, given the extremely low hits on which "Creationism" is based, probably not much should be made of comparing these graphs. The "evolution" graph itself is, I think, telling enough on its own.

To put some of these values in context, though, we should look at a few baseline moral concepts, to see how they rate on the internet:

What does the internet think about morality?

I will let the above conclusion speak for itself ... for now. It's worthy of another post at another time.

On a morality-related note, though ...

What does the internet think of religion?

Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all rank positively ... but check out atheism & Buddhism! Amazingly polarized results on these religious viewpoints. Again, I'll let the results speak for themselves, although I'm sure I'll come back to this in another post sometime.

For comparison, though:

So atheists are viewed basically as negatively as their doctrine ... but both Christians and Muslims are (fairly or unfairly) viewed negatively by the internet, despite the fact that their religions themselves are viewed positively.

And, finally, a grain of salt:

It's Official: I Talk Good!

Last month, I gave my first public talk and it went very well. The talk, presented at the Anderson Public Library, was entitled "String Theory for Everyone." Local high schools, as well as Anderson University, promoted the event, and many physics students in both places were offered extra credit for attending. Afterwards I was swarmed with fans wanting pictures with me ... mostly so they had proof for their teachers that they'd showed up.

Still, it was a good learning experience. Among other things, it showed me the places where I need to streamline my PowerPoint presentation before my next talk, on March 12 to the Central Indiana Mensa group.

As a follow-up, though, I asked for a testimonial letter from the library's information services librarian, who helped plan and coordinate the event. As I try to get more and more of these talks lined up, it of course helps to have these sorts of things. So, here's the fine (though somewhat bureaucratically sanitized) letter that I finally received:

The mission of the Anderson Public Library is to inform, connect, engage, and empower its customers. Since quality library programming meets many of the library's goals, APL strives to present its customers with the best possible programs. Your "String Theory for Everyone" presentation included all of the elements the library looks for in a quality program. You dealt with the complicated subject matter in an informative way while patiently allowing our customers to engage you with questions. Furthermore, your commitment to professionalism and excellent communication allowed the library to easily facilitate this program for our customers. On behalf of the Anderson Public Library, I would like to thank you for your efforts toward making this program a success!

This is a very nice addition to my speaking portfolio. I hope to get engagements in the future on a wide range of topics, some of which I already have planned. If any readers of this blog would like to solicit my speaking services for your organization, just contact me directly.

Note: I have many friends who are educators, so before I get frustrated e-mails from my elementary school grammar teacher, I'd like to state that I am aware that the title of this blog post is grammatically incorrect. It was done intentionally for entertainment effect. Grammarian, calm thyself.

Boskone Panel Schedule

I've received a preliminary schedule for my events at Boskone, the Boston science fiction convention of NESFA.  Boskone runs from Febrary 12 through February 14. I'll be taking part in a number of science-related panels. There could still be some changes before the actual event, but here's what I'm scheduled for as of this moment:

• Friday, Feb. 12 - 7:00 pm - Autographing
• Friday, Feb. 12 - 9:00 pm - The Place of Prediction in SF and Reality
• Sunday, Feb. 14 - 11:00 am - Bad Science on TV
• Sunday, Feb. 14 - 1:00 pm - Time Travel in Science and Science Fiction

I've got some great co-panelists, including Karl Schroeder, Allen Steele, & Vernor Vinge, so I'm really looking forward to it.

Changes Afoot -

Well, though I've let this blog sit defunct for nearly two years, I have not forgotten it. My work as the About.com Guide to Physics has taken up much of that time, as has falling in love and various other matters.

For those who have not heard, I have gotten engaged to my girlfriend of one year, Amber. We are anticipating a wedding in the fall, though still waiting for details to be hashed out, largely related to financial matters. I for one am looking forward tremendously to the marriage ... not quite so much to the wedding itself.

She's quite supportive of my various interests, especially my writing. She's a fan, in other words. Not necessarily a fan of science fiction in general, but a fan of my stuff. This is a plus, in my book, as it indicates that she has excellent taste and obvious refinement. Remember, therefore, that if you want to be cool, you'll read my stuff and like it! You may begin with "Diminished Capacity," which is available at the Abyss & Apex website, or the About Physics site, as your fancy suits you.

For those not interested in science fiction or physics, but still wanting to be cool, I have the entire Philosopher's Stone site and a bit of a MySpace page. In short, I'm all over this crazy World Wide Web like white on rice, my friends! Beware. Be very ware.

So check out the site, check out my writing, and see if anything I say is of any significance. Frequently, probably not. But every once in a while ... very rarely ... I may hit upon some nugget of eternal truth. And I, for one, wouldn't want to miss that!