Duggar Data

[singsingsing]

I just want to bring this to the attention of my fellow data/spreadsheet/prediction nerds - there's a Tumblr called 'Duggar Data' and it. is. spectacular.

https://duggardata.tumblr.com/

There was a little discussion about this over in the Bates forum, and we couldn't figure out if it was an FJer running it or not. If it is, please don't feel pressure to out yourself. I just want to share this really cool site with everyone, because I think a lot of you will enjoy it and find it valuable.

(And no, it's not me. I am not REMOTELY smart enough to do something like this. )

[justoneoftwo]

This site is amazing!  I love the analysis of when Jill and Jesse will have their next announcements!  

I will say I'm still holding out hope Jessa will beat Jill's longest spacing record, but we will probably not know until November if thats the case.

Also, it helps for me to see that we could expect a Jill announcement next month, unless she waits longer than she did with Sam.  Knowing the trends is fun and useful for discussions!

[BunnyBee]

I love the Duggar Data tumblr so much! Whoever runs it needs to branch out to some other fundie families, like the Rods. Even though I did have to take stats for my psych degree it was my hardest classed and I barely passed  But I enjoy reading other peoples data after they have done all the calculations 

[BunnyBee]

Quote

Adding everything up, 1,888 Duggar Descendants will’ve been born by (or on) December 31, 2060.  If you lost track, here’e the breakdown by generation—

Duggars Born By (or On) December 31, 2060 — 

First Generation—2  (Jim Bob, Michelle)

Second Generation—19  (Josh, Jana, JD, etc.)

Third Generation—278  (Mack, Izzy, Spud, etc.)

Fourth Generation—1,569  (Great–Grands)

Fifth Generation—20  (Great–Great Grands)

Also this simulation is particularly terrifying 

[albireo]

@BunnyBee And right after they start predicting who'll be dead by 2060 (likely just JB+M). Creepy but...mathematically interesting.

[justoneoftwo]

10 minutes ago, albireo said:

@BunnyBee And right after they start predicting who'll be dead by 2060 (likely just JB+M). Creepy but...mathematically interesting.

It could have been a lot more creepy, if they had looked more deeply into who might be dead (based on health, or things like that, you can get much better predictions than just life expectancy from the social security administration 

[NakedKnees]

8 minutes ago, albireo said:

@BunnyBee And right after they start predicting who'll be dead by 2060 (likely just JB+M). Creepy but...mathematically interesting.

First of all, what a cool Tumblr! I love it and can't wait to see what else they do.

Secondly, I disagree that this aspect is creepy. I was actually impressed with how the writer tackled that subject, with the well-wishes and "RIP" comments combined with the classic/funny mini golf pic  

The fact that everyone is mortal is vital to making this type of project interesting and somewhat accurate ("mathematically interesting" is a good way to put it ), and I just respect the way this blogger went about it.

[Joyfully_Unavailable]

1 hour ago, BunnyBee said:

I love the Duggar Data tumblr so much! Whoever runs it needs to branch out to some other fundie families, like the Rods. Even though I did have to take stats for my psych degree it was my hardest classed and I barely passed  But I enjoy reading other peoples data after they have done all the calculations 

I believe Duggar Data said they were willing to run numbers on Kellers, Rodrigues, Caldwells, etc but the birthdates and wedding dates were needed! Anyone with knowledge of any of these dates please submit them so we can have more spreadsheets!

[OhNoNike]

Wow. Just. Wow.  That’s amazing. 

[emmeline]

That is just outstanding. I'm off to dive into data! 

[The Wanderer]

I love Duggar Data! I’ve gotten into the habit of looking at it every day.

[anjulibai]

Wow! My spreadsheet feels so inadequate by comparison!

[Bethella]

2 hours ago, anjulibai said:

Wow! My spreadsheet feels so inadequate by comparison!

me too

[Briefly]

That's a fun rabbit hole!  I don't think I need rescue ferrets but it's still one that I'm going to spend a long time on!

[Tryamon]

I love this, but I find it really hard to navigate in the app. How does everyone else do it?

[Jinder Roles]

Wow! I have never found fundie data interesting but this is really well done. And the anon's ask really good/interesting questions. 

[SapphireSlytherin]

Can I just say how tickled proud I am that Duggar Data uses SiRen for Josiah + Lauren? LOL

[finnlassie]

Omg, thanks so much for the link! I didn't even know that I need all of this data!

I literally spent my morning going through this blog...

[singsingsing]

There were a couple asks about twins today, and it got me wondering again about who will be the first Duggar offspring to have twins. Odds are one of them will at one point. I'm trying to figure out who would be best/worst based on how huge of a deal they'd make about it.

Josh & Anna would be bad, because no more children need to be born into that situation, period. But on the other hand, they're quieter on social media and (hopefully?) wouldn't make it into a huge thing.

Jill & Derick would be awful, because I think they would make it into a huge thing, plus with Jill's history it would likely be a risky pregnancy (and God only knows what kind of prenatal care/birth she'd go for).

Jessa & Ben - I hope not, just because of Jessa's constant hinting and winking about twins. But maybe dealing with two kids under two has awakened her to the realities of having multiple very small children and she wouldn't be quite as glib about the possibility in the future?

Jinger & Jeremy - hmmm, neutral. Let's see how they do with one.

Joy & Austin - So far they seem to be keeping pretty quiet and low key. But they're also one of the most extreme couples in terms of religious dogma. And Joy seems to be following in sister mom Jill's footsteps when it comes to pregnancy and childbirth, so ehhhhh...

Joe & Kendra - I kind of have a feeling that Kendra will produce the first set of grandtwins. Kind of neutral on it for them, too.

Josiah & Lauren - ???

[Satan'sFortress]

BEC, but why are there "asks" instead of "questions?" 

[singsingsing]

20 minutes ago, Satan'sFortress said:

BEC, but why are there "asks" instead of "questions?" 

It's just Tumblr terminology. I don't really use Tumblr that much, so I have no idea why they're called asks instead of questions. Probably just a way to set them apart from other forums.

[SorenaJ]

28 minutes ago, Satan'sFortress said:

BEC, but why are there "asks" instead of "questions?" 

I'm not 100 %, but I think it's like, you can have a question within an "ask". So the message is an "ask", and that can contain a question, comment, whatever. 

[EyesOpen]

So cool...

i cant read far enough back right now. Does he or she predict courtship announcements? 

[singsingsing]

3 minutes ago, EyesOpen said:

So cool...

i cant read far enough back right now. Does he or she predict courtship announcements? 

I believe so! I think (s)he has an algorithm that predicts when each kid will court based on the average age a Duggar (or Bates) begins courting. Of course, it's just an average - which (s)he totally acknowledges. By which I mean, she's not claiming that every Duggar kid is definitely going to start courting at exactly 20.85 years of age (or whatever it may be) - just that that's the most likely age based on past data.

I scrolled back a bit and found this post: https://duggardata.tumblr.com/post/173771664494/im-not-sure-if-you-have-access-to-her-birth-date

Quote

The typical Female Duggar starts courting at Age 20.45.  Typically, the courtship lasts for 164 Days, pre–proposal.  Finally, it ends in a 1,000+ Guest wedding on a Friday or Saturday, after a brief, ~92–Day engagement.

 

[justoneoftwo]

I wonder if there is a better way to analyze the twins question.  Each time a Duggar daughter has a pregnancy there is a 3% chance of twins.  This increases after they are 25, and even more after 35.  For Jana the odds may be even as high as 1 in 7.  This is a more complex analysis, but I wonder how it would change it.