It’s hard to present evidence because there’s only one source. So the article basically calls out flaws in the methodology of Google Books/Ngram. I think this

It’s hard to present evidence because there’s only one source. So the article basically calls out flaws in the methodology of Google Books/Ngram. I think this is reasonable. As otherwise we end up accepting things that exist solely, but are flawed. Just because something exists and is easy to use doesn’t mean it’s right. Just like the answer to “the most tweeted thing is X therefore it is most popular and important” does not require a separate study to find the truth. It’s acceptable just to say “this is a stupid methodology, don’t accept it just because that’s what twitter says.”