| [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Thread Index] | [Date Prev] | [Date Next] | [Date Index] |
>Also worth noting is the the popular "Red State / Blue State" >dichotomy is a gross oversimplification. Traditionally red states >(like Texas) have some very blue counties, while some traditionally >blue states (like California and Illinois) have quite a number of >red areas. > >Check out the map on this website, nicknamed "Purple America". It's >a county by county breakdown of the 2004 election color coded by the >percentage of Bush/Kerry voters in that county... > >http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/ > >I think it is natural to assume that creationism thrives primarily >in red areas of the US. I wonder to what degree this assumption is >accurate. The Princeton map shows that if you break up the country into smaller political units, it is even redder than if it is broken up into 50 units. There is a statistics lesson in here somewhere. Unfortunately I think that the lesson is that the Electoral College works. I think it is time for the taphonomists on this list to weigh in with a pithy analogy about death assemblages. Bill -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ William P. Chaisson Adjunct Assistant Professor Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences University of Rochester Rochester, NY 14627 607-387-3892
Partial index: